Ixrec
June 30, 2018, 2:38pm
13
illustrious-you:
For inter-edition changes, where we can provide rustfix support, a marketing push, and a conceptual break between Rust idioms, I would argue that these changes should be fully considered.
In principle, absolutely. But this approach is and should be a last resort, and nothing in this thread comes close to the level of motivation required for that.
Or in other words, my thoughts on this are basically the same as this thread I posted on a few months ago :
Regardless of whether = or : is the better syntax, this change implies such a tremendously huge amount of churn that I consider it a complete non-starter.
For comparison, when I wrote the dyn trait RFC , I always felt that was just about the maximum amount of churn we could possibly get away with, and hopefully the churniest change we’re ever going to do after 1.0. And that was a case where the existing syntax was so deeply confusing that people often had no idea they were operating on trait objects rather than traits. Even if you don’t like today’s struct syntax, I don’t think anyone’s found : s so confusing that they failed to understand they were initializing a struct .
3 Likes