It’s an understandable interpretation for the lexical use of or which can imply exclusive disjunction.
In Rust the result type has the method .or() which returns either Ok(A) or Ok(B) (but not both), and I don’t see clambering to change it to xor, because the exclusive nature is implicit both linguistically and in the type state.
The result type in rust does not return a true/false but a type. More importantly though, it doesn’t return err if both values are set but simply returns the first value:
So… It’s not only not mapping your input to truth values, it also behaves more like I’d expect an “or” to behave, which is not “xor” or, if there’s more than two inputs, “exactly one”, but succeeding if any input is set.
…Which is basically how the OP’s or function also works, it takes several Option<T>s and returns the first valid one (and only that one), it doesn’t operate on boolean logic types — it’s a valid lexical use of or.
Using “or” to define a function that does “xor”… Did that guy never hear about formal logic? That’s, like, first or second semester stuff…
sigh
Could have used
oneOforexactlyOne, butoris definitely a bad choice.It’s an understandable interpretation for the lexical use of or which can imply exclusive disjunction.
In Rust the result type has the method
.or()which returns eitherOk(A)orOk(B)(but not both), and I don’t see clambering to change it toxor, because the exclusive nature is implicit both linguistically and in the type state.The result type in rust does not return a true/false but a type. More importantly though, it doesn’t return err if both values are set but simply returns the first value:
So… It’s not only not mapping your input to truth values, it also behaves more like I’d expect an “or” to behave, which is not “xor” or, if there’s more than two inputs, “exactly one”, but succeeding if any input is set.
…Which is basically how the OP’s
orfunction also works, it takes severalOption<T>s and returns the first valid one (and only that one), it doesn’t operate on boolean logic types — it’s a valid lexical use ofor.Absolutely not.
Emphasis mine.
It takes the input and fails if there is more than one valid one, which decidedly isn’t what’s an “or” in comp sci.