Pre-RFC: `=` for struct construction

[scottmcm]

I do like using = for both literals and patterns, since it would allow shorthand to be compatible with

Random Musings: types in patterns

The notion of types-in-patterns came up twice, afaict independently, within 8 hours of each other on Saturday: IRC https://botbot.me/mozilla/rust-lang/2018-04-14/?msg=98978699&page=1 (cc @varkor) RFCs https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2388#issuecomment-381300774 (I don’t actually intend to propose anything right now; just thought it an interesting area to explore.) For example, I rather like this: match "4".parse() { Ok(x: u16) => ..., Err(e) => ..., } Compared to ::<u16> or l…