On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 8:04 AM, spir <denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/01/2013 02:51 AM, Florian Zeitz wrote: > >> 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. >> > > +++ to all 3 points > > Denis >
I, too, am in favor of the `box` proposal. Short, intuitive, not already commonly used. What's not to like? Cheers, Tim _______________________________________________ > 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
