Controversial ideas I am strongly in favor of: - #[repr(boxed)] - Give Rc<T> and Arc<T> copy semantics.https://twitter.com/withoutboats/status/931343231681380352 …
-
-
Replying to @withoutboats
I want autoclone for those types but I want to be able to opt out per crate (my position since 2014 and I'm sticking to it)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats @withoutboats
A finer grained epoch-like per crate mechanism for this sounds pretty neat tbh.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I _think_ "copy semantics for Rc and Arc" isn't hard to hack together might try a poc compiler patch later.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManishEarth @wycats
The surface API is `unsafe trait AutoClone: Clone { }`.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @withoutboats @wycats
Yep that is what I'm thinking, except it's an autotrait somehow. The autotrait part is tricky with the bound so I can ignore it for poc.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @ManishEarth @withoutboats
I think it's fine to make it mandatory optin like Copy and not an OIBIT (
)
6:37 PM - 16 Nov 2017
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.