On 13-01-31 11:27 AM, Patrick Walton wrote:
> On 1/31/13 6:33 AM, Benjamin Striegel wrote:
>> +1 to this. Option 8 was always the best-case syntax, and prefixing an
>> apostrophe on lifetime names is entirely inoffensive.
>
> I like this as well.
As awkward as it is to be a source of direct contradiction, much less
one on syntax (sigh) I have to express my objection: I'm fine with the
use of a variable-sigil like 'a but putting the whole thing in {} is
terribly offputting to my eyes -- indeed, bringing any other bracketing
forms into the type language at all. Particularly when combining with
type parameters:
Foo{'lt}<X,Y>
seems past the point of tolerable reading. I'm sympathetic to the points
raised in the reddit thread concerning introducing lifetime names via
the <> binder on a function call, as well as the lower value of &<'a>
vs. &'a. I'm am ok with &'a T (or even 'a&T) rather than &<'a>T if
there's strong preference there; the preference I expressed in the
meeting for the latter was only minor.
I would strongly prefer no more uses of brackets though.
</BDFL-syntax-bikeshed>
-Graydon
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
