Hi,
On 28/07/2013 03:34, Erick Tryzelaar wrote:
That said, I still think there is a good argument about whether or not
we need unsafe pointers in the library or in the language. bstrie
brought up this idea of moving *T out of the language and into a
library, as in an Unsafe<T> or RawPtr<T> type.
Right now one of Rust's biggest strengths is how easy it is to interface
with C libraries. Rust stands alone in how well integrated it is.
Removing *T and replacing it with a generic struct is going to make this
very simple thing very complicated. Why do that? Just to get rid of a
star?
It would be a different thing if we could build things like
std::shared_ptr<T> and overload all operators and it integrates well
into the rest of the language, but Rust is not built with that in mind.
Just look at how much more complicated bindings to C libraries would
become if you remove *T.
Regards,
Armin
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
