On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Niko Matsakis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I stand by the arguments I made in that post. My experience at least
> has been that implicit moves have been much more pleasant to work with
> than explicit ones, and the language is simpler as well.

I agree, and I think this is one of the most compelling features of
the language. The lack of implicit heap allocations is a great example
of Rust being more suited to systems programming than C++. It's also
nice to have the guarantee that every type can be moved or swapped,
since it leads to being able to write very flexible move-only
containers.
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev

Reply via email to