On Mar 14, 2011, at 5:21 AM, Marijn Haverbeke wrote: > That being said, I have no intention of dragging functors, monoids, or > other category-theory mumbo-jumbo into Rust. When possible, I agree we > should stick to widely-known terminology. 'Interfaces' would have been > just as good a word as 'typeclasses'. But they have been invented and > popularized as 'typeclasses', so that's probably the best word to use > for them now.
C+0x tried "concepts", ended up deferring them. Seemed like typeclasses in all but name -- anyone know more? /be _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
