It's okay, it's our own fault for not having yet written a document
entitled "Things That Absolutely Will Not Change And That We Are Tired Of
Discussing." :P
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Gaetan <gae...@xeberon.net> wrote:
> Sorry for this offtopic subject..
> Le 30 nov. 2013 20:20, "Benjamin Striegel" <ben.strie...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Is is possible to get rid of this returnless return?
>> > I mean, it is really hard yo read, why not enforcing the use of return
>> statement, always?
>>
>> This isn't the point of this thread, and also I don't think anybody is
>> willing to revisit this issue. Consider that ship as having sailed beyond
>> the horizon.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Gaetan <gae...@xeberon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Is is possible to get rid of this returnless return?
>>>
>>> I mean, it is really hard yo read, why not enforcing the use of return
>>> statement, always?
>>> Le 30 nov. 2013 19:59, "György Andrasek" <jur...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>> On 11/30/2013 07:41 PM, Pierre Talbot wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you have suggestions that could fit well for this kind of project?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Make the following code compile:
>>>>
>>>> ```
>>>> fn foo() {
>>>> bar()
>>>> fn bar() {}
>>>> }
>>>> ```
>>>>
>>>> i.e. allow nested function declarations after a semicolonless return
>>>> expression.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rust-dev mailing list
>>>> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rust-dev mailing list
>>> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rust-dev mailing list
>> Rust-dev@mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
