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 Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev