Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

union syntax fix for empty field list #1509

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 7, 2024
Merged

union syntax fix for empty field list #1509

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion src/items/unions.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
> **<sup>Syntax</sup>**\
> _Union_ :\
> &nbsp;&nbsp; `union` [IDENTIFIER]&nbsp;[_GenericParams_]<sup>?</sup> [_WhereClause_]<sup>?</sup>
> `{`[_StructFields_] `}`
> `{`[_StructFields_]<sup>?</sup> `}`

A union declaration uses the same syntax as a struct declaration, except with
`union` in place of `struct`.
Expand All @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ This restriction ensures, in particular, that union fields never need to be
dropped. Like for structs and enums, it is possible to `impl Drop` for a union
to manually define what happens when it gets dropped.

Unions without any fields are not accepted by the compiler, but can be accepted by macros.

## Initialization of a union

A value of a union type can be created using the same syntax that is used for
Expand Down