On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 09:43:45AM +1100, Huon Wilson wrote: > This will make transmuting ~ to get a * (e.g., to allocate memory for > storage in an Rc, with automatic clean-up by transmuting back to ~ on > destruction) harder to get right, won't it?
See my other e-mail about choosing a representation for `*T`. I am currently thinking that the representation of `~T`, `&T`, and `*T` should be the same for all `T`. I think this addresses a number of issues and opens up new capabilities, though it does mean an unused "capacity" word for `&[T]` and `*[T]`. See issue #10295. Anyway, I am not sure if I am making sense -- I'd say this calls for a long-winded blog post. Or more likely 2 or 3. I spent some time yesterday working out some of the details for supporting custom allocators as well as higher-kinded types, so I've got a lot to write about... Niko _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
