We could go with `&unrestricted` instead, which has the benefit of being semantically compatible with the C keyword `restrict` (which only a handful of C programmers even know about). Although it's a bit unwieldy.
-Kevin On Sep 19, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Daniel Micay <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Niko Matsakis <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:15:47PM +0000, Bill Myers wrote: > > BTW, how about keeping it, and calling it "&volatile" instead of > > "&const", since that's what C uses to name something that can be > > changed outside the program's control? > > That's the best proposed name I've seen. One problem might be that it > has a known meaning to C programmers which is distinct (but > overlapping) from the meaning in Rust... > > > > Niko > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > > LLVM also uses the term `volatile` with the same meaning as C, and I expect > we will need to expose it if only to make it possible to write non-useless > #[bench] tests. > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
