What happened to it?
I can not live without it.
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Brian Anderson bander...@mozilla.com
wrote:
# Impact
Installing rustc to non-default locations will result in an installation
that puts some important libraries in a location the dynamic linker won't
find, will need to be compensated for with
Congrat and thank for the good work!
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Alex Crichton a...@crichton.co wrote:
Mozilla and the Rust community are pleased to announce version 0.11.0
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
A new number appeared in the version 0.11.0 compared to 0.10. This
looks like a preparation for 0.11.1, ... . Are you starting to support
these releases with bug-eliminations?
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
Please do not create examples for _all_ entities in the API doc. In case of
trivial entities [like Iterator::filter] it would just unnecessarily
decrease the conciseness of the doc. Also: think about the amount of update
this may make necessary in case Rust language syntax changes.
On Tue, Jun
One long-standing problem of mine with the docs is that they are split to
multiple sources: tutorial, manual, RustByExample, RustForC++Programmers,
... . Would be nice to have one central starting location and a strict
hierarchy of links from the center to a searched topic, and then being able
to
A tip:
Monitor StackOverflow for Rust tagged questions, and after each reasonable
question modify the doc so that going to SO becomes unnecessary for those
who sought answer in the doc first.
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
My question is rather theoretical, from the libre-and-open-source-software
point of view.
Bootstrapping needs an already existing language to compile the first
executable version of Rust.
I read that this was OCaml at some time. I do not have OCaml on my machine,
but still managed to build from
Do you plan to create a cleaner full-bootstrap process? By cleaner I mean
dividing stage-0 to more [sub-]stages, which would be well-defined and
documented in terms of the set of language features it implements.
Currently these sub-stages are defined by a team member's mood to instruct
the
Alexander, your option 2 could be done automatically. By appending
postfixes to the overloaded name depending on the parameter types.
Increasing the number of letters used till the ambiguity is fully resolved.
What do you think?
fillRect_RF_B ( const QRectF rectangle, const QBrush brush )
Daniel Micay danielmi...@gmail.com wrote:
... the default
allocator, which is jemalloc right now.
Rust's memory management is still under-documented in the manual. I have a
question which have been bothering me for a while. I may have misunderstood
something basic.
Jemalloc AFAIK
Devs, please explain how such option could decrease the safety of the
language. As it would be just that, an option, an opt-in one.
IMHO it even could increase the safety of Rust. There are some extreme
optimizing C++ programmers currently. Yes, they are a small fraction, but
they exist. And they
Thank Björn Steinbrink for your example. Though Daniel already mentioned
the key [the difference between the runtime and logic errors] earlier
many times, I only now understood it from the example.
Sorry
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
Do not close this thread. This is actually the most exciting one currently.
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Tim Chevalier catamorph...@gmail.comwrote:
I found using higher-order functions
directly to be much more naturalhttps://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
So true.
___
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
15 matches
Mail list logo
