At a recent triage meeting for the libs team @SimonSapin brought up an excellent point about how the allocator traits in the standard library (covered by #42774) would be a great candidate for a working group. From the libs team itself there aren’t any current volunteers to lead (or facilitate), but we’re curious if others are interested in doing so!
Are you interested in being a part of a working group dedicated to paving a path for a standard set of allocator traits to be used in collections? Are you interested in leading such a subgroup? This would be the place to start! We aren’t ready to commit to the existence of a working group actually coming about, but the libs team was interested in gauging interest in the community for such a working group if it existed.
I am interested. Not too much time either, but definitely willing to rebase my old PRs and add more collections to them once the toehold of Box<T, A> lands.
I’m also interested. I previously did a lot with the current allocator api and I’d like to contribute. However I don’t think I have the experience to lead the group but I’d really like to be part of it!
Participation from anyone is most welcome, but fair warning: this WG is unlikely to discuss many implementation details of allocators. Its focus on the trait(s) and other APIs to use them, and making collections such as Vec generic over the allocator type.
This is exactly what I need in my Project and thus I reimplemented some structures to support an Allocator (Vec, HashMap, Arc so far). Additionally I experimented around with different traits to support Allocators like DefaultIn and FromIteratorIn (and related things like Iterator::collect_in).
I'd love to share those experiences with the WG and add them (if desired) to the Rust project.
I’m quite interested in seeing these traits fleshed out and stabilised, but I don’t think I’ll be able to commit too much time. Certainly not remotely enough to lead. If there’s room on the hypothetical WG for someone with those caveats, count me in.
@ErichDonGubler that’s awesome! FWIW the libs team doesn’t have a ton of opinions about how this WG would work and operate, so if you’d like to facilitate then it’d largely be up to you to how you’d like to run it. It definitely sounds like there’s tons of interest for participation here, so I suspect you wouldn’t have a lack of people there!
I think your link to introduce facilitations might be off – not sure what Niko’s post has specifically to do with facilitation, though it does have to do with governance in general. Maybe you meant Manish’s blog post section introducing the idea?
Do others interested in this topic have a suggestion about where to hold discussions? @SimonSapin I believe recommended on IRC that a new GitHub repository might be a good place to start, and if y’all would like I can create one and let y’all have at it!
