On 24/06/14 08:39 PM, Vadim Chugunov wrote: > I mostly agree, though for #1, I think that new int types would be more > appropriate. A set of special operators seems like an overkill for a > relatively infrequently used functionality. Annotations are too broad > (what if I need to do both wrapping and non-wrapping calculations in the > same scope?).
Introducing new types would make the language more painful to use, and it would be difficult to determine the correct types to use at API boundaries. It would be a large backwards compatibility hazard among other issues, and would introduce performance overhead due to issues like `&[u32]` and `&[u32c]` being different types.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
