I have been reading Rust's introduction, and the one area where I feel
pretty lost is with regard to the error handling. Consider a simple
program like cat that opens, reads a file, writing it chunk-by-chunk
to standard output. As we know, the syscalls for open, read, and
write can all fail,
On 2012-03-19, at 18:28 , Graydon Hoare wrote:
The longer answer is that we're familiar with the CL condition system as well
as a number of alternatives, and need to spend some time exploring to find
what fits the Rust semantics best. I spent quite a while sketching,
prototyping and
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Daniel Farina dan...@fdr.io wrote:
I think a good example of this is given in a chapter of Practical Common
Lisp:
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/beyond-exception-handling-conditions-and-restarts.html
CL's flavor of exception handling is probably the only
On 3/19/12 6:56 PM, Tim Chevalier wrote:
I don't think we have any plans to add implicit casts as implied by
your other 4 examples. It seems too complex -- if any of the variables
in your example were mutated after being initialized, the pass that
would insert these casts would get pretty
On 12-03-19 07:00 PM, Patrick Walton wrote:
On 3/19/12 6:56 PM, Tim Chevalier wrote:
I don't think we have any plans to add implicit casts as implied by
your other 4 examples. It seems too complex -- if any of the variables
in your example were mutated after being initialized, the pass that
On 08/03/2012 2:48 PM, Jeff Schultz wrote:
Yes, I appreciate the motive. Could the same goal be achieved by
refusing to introspect a library that *doesn't* have a mangled name in
any location where there are more than one instances of the library
name or which can otherwise be deduced to be an
