You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, nothing lives in the top level of std, and directory modules like rustc::syntax can't contain code. We want especially for the standard library to define things like std::option::t as std::option.
This is one way to achieve that goal.
We add a convention that a .rs file with the same name as a directory module provides that module's implementation, and a .rs file with the same name as a crate (or the .rc file) provides the crate-level module's implementation.
So for standard we might have a directory layout like:
lib/
coll.rs - the std::coll module's implementation
coll/
list.rs - the std::coll::list module
std.rc
std.rs the std module's implementation
We would probably want a way to explicitly override this as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently, nothing lives in the top level of std, and directory modules like rustc::syntax can't contain code. We want especially for the standard library to define things like std::option::t as std::option.
This is one way to achieve that goal.
We add a convention that a .rs file with the same name as a directory module provides that module's implementation, and a .rs file with the same name as a crate (or the .rc file) provides the crate-level module's implementation.
So for standard we might have a directory layout like:
We would probably want a way to explicitly override this as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: