> 2. The dot after the nullary tag. In general I want to write a nullary tag a
> LOT
> more often than I want to write a wildcard binder, so I feel like this is the
> wrong way for this choice to go, but I'll understand if this is a decided
> issue
> already.
I agree the dot is problematic, but I'm *very* skeptical about your
assertion that you're writing more nullary tag patterns than binders.
At least in the compiler, I think we see at least ten times more
binders than nullary tags.
> 4. I wish a lot more of the standard library was object-oriented. I realize
> this
> is somewhat of a slippery slope, but writing 'vec::len(thing)' is less nice
> (to
> me) than thing.len(). I think that things in the standard library that are
> object-like (vec, str, ...) should be objects.
This is part of the reason we're implementing interfaces (type classes).
> 5. I do not like the mk_foo()/obj foo {} idiom; it forces code another tabstop
> to the right.
If interfaces work out, they'll probably replace the current obj system.
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
