Any reason for using tuple structs instead of normal structs?

[mainrs]

For example here:

chumsky/src/combinator.rs

Lines 464 to 466 in 40fe7d1

	#[must_use]
	#[derive(Copy, Clone)]
	pub struct Repeated<A>(pub(crate) A, pub(crate) usize, pub(crate) Option<usize>);

This requires to do further digging and taking a look at some methods of Repeated to understand what the fields are supposed to mean. Is there any reason why you did not choose to define Repeated as:

#[must_use]
#[derive(Copy, Clone)]
pub struct Repeated<A> {
    inner: A,
    min: usize,
    max: Option<usize>,
}

[zesterer]

No specific reason other than convenience at the time. zero-copy (which is the branch I'd recommend for all new development, given that it's a near-total rewrite of the crate) has explicit fields.

That said, the fields of Repeated are not public deliberately and understanding them shouldn't be required to use chumsky.

[mainrs]

That said, the fields of Repeated are not public deliberately and understanding them shouldn't be required to use chumsky.

Definitely not, no. I was just taking a look at chumsky and its API to get some inspiration for a library I am working on. That's why I noticed it.

Thanks for the explanation!

[zesterer]

Good luck with your library!