> > > 2. This discussion is getting a bit far from specifics of how to > improve Rust. Please take it elsewhere. If there is interest, we may > start a rust-cafe list in the vein of haskell-cafe for off-topic-ish > discussions (or, in fact, anybody could, on Google Groups). But for > now, please try to keep discussions on this list narrowly focused. >
I think designing for Intellisense and auto completion is very important these days especially when you have huge number of libs or a large runtime . This means no short names taking up the namespace etc In addition the OO to functional story must be resolved and clear. Like it or not 90% of people are OO coders , which is rammed down your throats at every university in the world so you need a convincing case.. Personally most coders dont bother with inheritance anymore but full polymorphism through interfaces are important ( including having a typename in a file and then creating it at runtime) . If you cant provide this form of polymorphism then the alternatives , impact and reasons with examples need to be document. Haskell people understand typeclasses but they may struggle with Rust objects/traits while OO people will try to think of it in terms of generics.,.explaining and having a clear story for this middle ground is crucial. Ben
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
