> True. But it's not clear to me why you would use vec::all() for the loop > function unless you wanted to know whether you broke out of the loop or not > (in other words, if you don't want to see the result, don't use vec::all()).
Sure. But now we have three variants for almost the same thing -- `vec::iter` to iterate without breaking, `vec::each` to be able to break but not return a result, and `vec::all` to get a result value. This seems excessive. Anyway, the current implementation does what you wanted, and I'm not about to change it, so rest easy. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
