JustForFun88

> > Why not consider... > > I'm afraid I don't understand what you have in mind. Perhaps that would be easier with a code sample? So I came up...

> `get_many_mut` on slices ([rust-lang/rust#83608](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83608)) does not _need_ to handle a variable number of keys (although it might be nice) because, worse case scenario, you can sort your input array...

@Amanieu, @Ten0 What if we provide the following API (draft pull request #408): ```rust pub fn try_get_many_key_value_mut, Q: ?Sized + Hash + Equivalent + 'a, { /* implementation */ }...

In your closed pull request, you can simply correct not only the spelling, but also the tests themselves. Just run `cargo test --doc` after correcting the spelling and the compiler...

> That is already possible with the `+` operator, no? So the usecase here would only be that it's exposed in a method. For two arrays, this can indeed be...

> Nope, it works for any number of arrays already. This operation can only be performed on two arrays. For example, this works: ```rust #let res = (1, 2) +...

> > > That is already possible with the `+` operator, no? So the usecase here would only be that it's exposed in a method. > > > > >...

> This is already possible through `join()`. The code below returns `(1, 2, 3, 4)`: > > ```typst > #((1, 2), (3, 4)).join() > ``` Yes, this is indeed possible...

> One thing that I'm not a big fan of with `append` is that it sounds like a sequence-alike of `push`, but here it works differently (returning a new array...

> What I meant isn't related to `EcoVec`, but just to Typst. Consider this: > > ``` > let x = (1, 2) > let y = x.push(3) > assert.eq(y,...