Would it make sense to add an additional exercise to move_semantics?

Open
  • Is something wrong?
#2,063 2 comments 2 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
3/5
Estimated time
1-2 days
Newbie friendliness
25/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Stale
Tech stack
rust
Domain
tooling

Research direction

Start by reviewing move_semantics6.rs and the surrounding move_semantics exercises to understand the existing progression and identify what an additional exercise would teach. Confirm the desired scope with maintainers before implementing anything; done means a concrete new exercise has been added to the move_semantics set.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

A-exercises C-new-exercise

Rustlings is amazing. Heartfelt thanks to everyone involved.

I just finished move_semantics6.rs which I found quite tricky but very helpful once I solved it and understood the necessary syntax to implement ownership in one spot and borrowing in another.

Would Rustlings benefit from another similar, perhaps just a smidge more complex exercise given the tricky nature of the subject matter?

Thanks again in any case! Just a thought :)

Dominant language
Rust
Stars
64.6k
Forks
11.3k
No merged PRs in 30d

Getting set up

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from rust-lang/rustlings

All issues in rust-lang/rustlings

Similar issues

More Rust issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.