this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
332 points (90.7% liked)

Programmer Humor

24932 readers
1615 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
Feyter@programming.dev
anzo@programming.dev
BurningTurtle@programming.dev
pylapp@programming.dev
332
Why make it complicated? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
122 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Made with KolourPaint and screenshots from Kate (with the GitHub theme).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

At least be fair and cut out the .into()

[–] nebeker@programming.dev 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Haradion@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If type constraints later in the function let the compiler infer the type, this syntax totally works.

[–] nebeker@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago

Like if the variable is then used in a function that only takes one type? Huh.