On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Greg <g...@kinostudios.com> wrote: > I don't think Rust can succeed as a language if it massively differs, > visually, from the language it intends to offset (C++). > > Yes, I agree, and that's why I wrote: > > "By this point, I'm aware that this is unlikely to happen." > > I think it's still possible to simplify Rust's existing syntax while > maintaining the features it offers. >
My point is that the familiar syntax *is* a feature. What simplifications do you propose? I think everyone is mostly happy with the syntax at this point, so your proposed changes and justification are going to be very pursuasive, and followed by a PR, for there to be a chance of them being accepted. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
