

And bow to the compiler’s whims? I think not!
This shouldn’t compile, because .into needs the type from the left side and let needs the type from the right side.
And bow to the compiler’s whims? I think not!
This shouldn’t compile, because .into needs the type from the left side and let needs the type from the right side.
I came here to laugh, not to cry!
[clicks light switch off and on repeatedly]
Welp, I guess we’re closed for the week.
I’d say I feel seen, but it’s really dark in here.
let a = String::from(“Hello, world!”).into()
I’ll see myself out.
Common criticisms here would be that these endeavors stifle creativity and show the adoption of modern solutions. That said, I find conducting “code archeology” to figure out the idiomatic way of doing something in an old project very rewarding. Because computer programs exist in people’s mind’s, doing that with the support of original developers or subject matter experts is some of the most effective knowledge transfer I’ve ever witnessed.
Like if the variable is then used in a function that only takes one type? Huh.