On Wed, 2025-12-31 at 13:47 -0800, John Hubbard wrote: > The builder-pattern setters (self -> Self) enabled method chaining like: > > reg.set_foo(x).set_sec(y).write(bar); > > This made separate operations appear as a single expression, obscuring > that each setter is a distinct mutation.
So you're concerned about the fact that the compiler is not merging the set_foo(x) and the set_sec(y) into a single read-modify-write? > These setters are infallible, > so the chaining provides no error-propagation benefit—it just obscures > what are simple, independent assignments. > > Change the bitfield!() macro to generate `&mut self` setters, so each > operation is a distinct statement: > > reg.set_foo(x); > reg.set_sec(y); > reg.write(bar); Are you sure about this? It just seems like you're throwing out a neat little feature of Rust and replacing it with something that's very C-like. This breaks compatible with all users of the regs macros. Seems really disruptive for what seems to me like a cosmetic change.
