On 02/19/2014 02:37 AM, György Andrasek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Brian Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
Backwards-compatibility is guaranteed.
Does that include ABI compatibility?
Second, the AST is traversed and stability index is propagated downward to any
indexable node that isn't explicitly tagged.
Should it be an error to use lower stability internally?
By default all nodes are *stable* - library authors have to opt-in to stability
index tracking. This may end up being the wrong default and we'll want to
revisit.
Oh dear god no. `stable` should be *earned* over time, otherwise it's
meaningless. The compiler should treat untagged code as `unstable`,
`experimental` or a special `untagged` stability and accept that level
by default.
OK, I agree let's start all code at `#[experimental]`. It's not too much
burden for authors that don't want part of it to put an attribute on
their crates.
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
