> Personally I would prefer if & in Rust worked similar to const T& in c++
In that case, you would not be able to tell whether a function argument was passed by value or by reference. I actually like this feature about Rust (C# has it too with the `ref` keyword). -- Ziad On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Vadim <vadi...@gmail.com> wrote: > So why did Rust adopt auto-moving instead of explicit moving? If the > second example had to be written as foo(move a) there would be no > confusion. The and the third example should arguably be sort(mut > a.as_mut_slice()). > > Personally I would prefer if & in Rust worked similar to const T& in c++ > (i.e. for most intents and purposes you can treat a reference as a value), > otherwise half of the arguments on each function call will have to be > adorned with ampersands. > > Can we have it such that foo(a) would be guaranteed to not mutate or move > a and require "mut" or "move" prefix otherwise? > > > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > Rust-dev@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
