On 13-04-28 10:38 AM, Patrick Walton wrote:
Thoughts?
I think I'm ok with it. I don't understand all the implications, and
bjz's use-cases worry me also, but I think what you're proposing will be
less-weird than current.
As far as 'use' not reaching into traits; can local typedefs serve the
(resending a mail I wrote earlier, since I forgot to reply to all)
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for bringing this up. This is definitely something we should
fix. I had in mind similar changes to what you suggested, but I don't
think it's necessary to limit what paths can appear in `use`
statements (though
Hi everyone,
The reactions to this bug on impls [1] have caused me to think that the
current treatment of paths in generic type and trait implementations is
something of a wart and perhaps should be reworked. Specifically, the
problem is that this:
implT MyTypeT {
fn newU() -
But you can't. In fact, you can't call static methods *at all* through
typedefs, meaning that this doesn't work:
This has bitten me a few times already, so I'm definitely in favor of
making it work if possible. The rest of your proposal sounds good to
me, although I can't speak for how easy it
On 04/28/2013 10:38 AM, Patrick Walton wrote:
Hi everyone,
The reactions to this bug on impls [1] have caused me to think that
the current treatment of paths in generic type and trait
implementations is something of a wart and perhaps should be reworked.
Specifically, the problem is that
