this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
310 points (99.1% liked)

Programmer Humor

24921 readers
1414 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
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Can't resist pointing out how you should actually write the function in a "real" scenario (but still not handling errors properly), in case anyone wants to know.

If the list is guaranteed to have exactly two elements:

fn is_second_num_positive_exact(input: &str) -> bool {
    let (_, n) = input.split_once(',').unwrap();
    n.parse::<i32>().unwrap() > 0
}

If you want to test the last element:

fn is_last_num_positive(input: &str) -> bool {
    let n = input.split(',').next_back().unwrap();
    n.parse::<i32>().unwrap() > 0
}

If you want to test the 2nd (1-indexed) element:

fn is_second_num_positive(input: &str) -> bool {
    let n = input.split(',').nth(1).unwrap();
    n.parse::<i32>().unwrap() > 0
}
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Even better to use expect with a short message of what the assumption is: "the string should contain a comma" if it ever panics you'll know exactly why.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Can still use .is_positive(), though...