{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiat6u3f3jylauhn4rt3uhu2yg35rpcmsva7idh5oqc7w5kozitayq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mgvoha76cyl2"
  },
  "path": "/t/implement-fusediterator-for-core-stepby/24074#post_2",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-12T17:54:33.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "mineichen:\n\n> Do i miss something?\n\nI don't think so. This `impl` seems appropriate. The only questions I'd have are:\n\n  * Should the `impl` be unconditional?\n  * Should the correctness of the `impl` be ~~dependent~~ independent on the correctness of the underlying `Iterator`'s `impl`?\n\n\n\nThe answer to both of those is \"no\" in my opinion. The API docs explain the behavior of `StepBy` pretty clearly, so answering \"yes\" to either of the two questions would constitute a change to how `StepBy` is implemented which in turn would be a breaking change based on its API documentation. There are also already `FusedIterator` `impl`s in `core` whose correctness is dependent on the correctness of the underlying `Iterator`'s `impl`.",
  "title": "Implement FusedIterator for core::iter::StepBy"
}