-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
doc: add a new language design faq #14370
Conversation
cc @brson @steveklabnik @sfackler (people who reviewed the draft) |
|
||
### `struct`s | ||
|
||
In a Rust long-gone, `struct` layout was defined to be the same as C. Now, they |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"long-gone"... 3 days ago :P
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Docs are forever!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Speaking of this, I feel really strongly that docs should be written in the present. I'd remove this whole first line.
Also, this needs makefile changes. |
change. One main benefit is that, when indexing arrays, having a pointer-sized | ||
index type lets you address the entire address space. | ||
|
||
## No guaranteed Tail-call optimization |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be "tail-call" with a small t?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, given that the rest of the headings aren't in title case.
I believe I have addressed all review. @steveklabnik I've addressed the reddit comment by linking to the ML post by graydon which lays out the same concern. |
This document outlines some design decisions in the Rust language and why they | ||
were made. Many of these are things that will not change. Unless you have an | ||
extremely compelling argument that isn't presented here, proposing they be | ||
changed is a waste of everyone's time. Many of these have technical |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"waste of everyone's time" is unnecessarily harsh. I'd say, instead:
"These decisions were arrived at after lengthy discussion and experimenting with alternatives. Please do not propose reversing them unless you have a new, extremely compelling argument."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agree about the tone here.
I've removed the section on exceptions and int/uint. I don't have strong answers for them, and I can envision them possibly changing. |
This indends to help quell frequently answered questions about the language design in a single, authoritative place.
This indends to help quell frequently answered questions about the language design in a single, authoritative place.
This indends to help quell frequently answered questions about the language
design in a single, authoritative place.