On 30.11.2013 23:50, Patrick Walton wrote: > Right, I agree with this. Kevin's argument that C++ "new" has different > behavior is valid though, and makes me conflicted. > > BTW, I was thinking about "make" as well. Go is precedent that both > "new" and "make" can coexist (though not without controversy...) Old > Rust used to use "mk" as the constructor convention. > > Patrick >
If I may chime in here. I agree with Kevin that the different semantics of `new` are more likely to create confusion, than alleviate it. Personally I would suggest calling this operator `box`, since it "boxes" its argument into a newly allocated memory box. After all, these are different semantics from C++'s `new` (and also Go's `make` AFAICT), therefore, presuming that a sigil is not a sufficient indicator of a non-stack allocation, using an unprecedented keyword seems the way to go to me. Regards, Florian _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
