this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
464 points (96.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

27933 readers
554 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)
  1. Macro syntax technically isn't even Rust
  2. This is definitely not average Rust code.
[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sorry, I love Rust but I can't really agree with you here. They only showed a macro_rules! definition, which is definitely rust syntax. Lifetime annotations are relatively common.

I will concede that loop labels are incredibly rare though.

[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 1 points 12 hours ago

I guess I see what you mean if we want to get very technical about what a syntax extension is. But I think for the purpose of this discussion, it's reasonable to think of macro_rules! as a part of the Rust language. Practically speaking, it is syntax provided by the language team, not just users of the language who are free to extend the syntax by using macro_rules! to do so.

[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 4 points 1 day ago

Loop labels are rare, but they lead to much simpler/clearer code when you need them. Consider how you would implement this kind of loop in a language without loop variables:

'outer: while (...) {
    'inner: while (...) {
        if (...) {
            // this breaks out of the outer loop, not just the inner loop
            break 'outer;
        }
    }

    // some code here
}

In C/C++ you'd need to do something like

bool condition = false;
while (...) {
    while (...) {
        if (...) {
            condition = true;
            break;
        }
    }
    if (condition) {
        break;
    }

    // some code here
}

Personally, I wouldn't call it ugly, either, but that's mostly a matter of taste

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What language are they then? They're not Python, JS,

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

You used macro_rules, which is not common at all. Most rust files don't contain any macro definition.

This code doesn't even compile. There is a random function definition, and then there are loose statements not inside any code block.

The loop is also annotated, which is not common at all, and when loops are annotated it's a blessing for readability. Additionally, the loop (+annotation) is indented for some reason.

And the loop doesn't contain any codeblock. Just an opening bracket.

Also, the function definition contains a lifetime annotation. While they are not uncommon, I wouldn't say the average rust function contains them. Of course their frequency changes a lot depending on context, but in my experience most functions I write/read don't have lifetime annotations at all.

Yes, what you wrote somewhat resembles rust. But it is in no way average rust code.