Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Should non_exhaustive get a place in the book? #2093

Closed
steveklabnik opened this issue Sep 15, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Should non_exhaustive get a place in the book? #2093

steveklabnik opened this issue Sep 15, 2019 · 4 comments
Assignees
@steveklabnik
Labels
Enhancement Q for ourselves
Milestone
ch6

Comments

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Follow up on #1955
@steveklabnik steveklabnik mentioned this issue Sep 15, 2019
Closed
@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member Author

Today's random opinion. I think that it should. It shouldn't be too large. I want to investigate what the actual diff would be, though.

@steveklabnik steveklabnik self-assigned this Apr 6, 2020
@carols10cents
Copy link
Member

My thought today is that it should not :) But if it is, then I feel like it should go... hm... chapter 6, with enums and match? Appendix? Wherever we add documentation about attributes? I'm going to put it in the chapter 6 milestone for now.

@carols10cents carols10cents added this to the ch6 milestone Jul 17, 2021
@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member Author

I think it being unclear where it goes indicates that maybe it shouldn't go in. Not sure how strongly I feel either way today.

@carols10cents
Copy link
Member

Ok, today I feel like closing this :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@steveklabnik steveklabnik

Labels
Enhancement Q for ourselves
Projects
None yet
Milestone
ch6
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@steveklabnik @carols10cents