On 12/06/2013 1:33 PM, Ziad Hatahet wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Gareth Smith
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
My rust code breaks every time I get the latest incoming anyway -
and it is a pretty mechanical change.
I agree. There are no guarantees that current code will not break in
future versions of the language, until it stabilizes. Looking at what
other new languages are facing when they start to carry over cruft, I
think Rust is at an advantage here to try as much as possible to "get
things right".
Eh, unclear to me. I am partial to the existing syntax (reads like
do-notation, which I think we're keeping) and avoids breaking tons of
code and adding a keyword. Also supports no-arg iteration like:
for 1000.times { ... }
which, curiously, we actually use from time to time.
-Graydon
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
