On 2/26/13 5:25 PM, Nathan Fiedler wrote:
Hello all
I was reading the language tutorial and had a couple of questions. I
hope this is the appropriate forum for asking them.
In section 4.1 the example has "return 0", seemingly as an expression.
Is that correct usage? Should it not simply be "0"
Hello all
I was reading the language tutorial and had a couple of questions. I hope
this is the appropriate forum for asking them.
In section 4.1 the example has "return 0", seemingly as an expression. Is
that correct usage? Should it not simply be "0" instead?
Section 5.3 describes tuples and t
On 13-02-24 12:06 PM, Ashish Myles wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Ashish Myles wrote:
>>
>> Wait a sec...I guess we are barking up the wrong tree. The problem is
>> not that rust macros don't support $n:integer, but that static array
>> initialization seem to require a raw integer lite
> More or less as a note to myself and Paul: I claim that this problem
> would be solved by a token-tree-based macro system.
There's another consequence of a such a macro system related to this: You
could write `[T * some_macro!(...)]`, but only on the right-hand side of a
macro definition.
> - you can now use the 'foo lifetime notation, though you don't have to
> (emacs users, if you update your emacs-mode the syntax highlighter will
> recognize 'foo. vi users, you're on your own). Once we do a snapshot,
> the 'foo notation will become mandatory. (Note: within the compiler, you
> s
Hello,
Once I finish up my latest pull request, the first
non-backwards-compatible steps toward the new lifetime syntax will be in
place. I'll try to send a mail for each change that requires modifying
source code. Note: since the pull request hasn't landed yet, the changes
I describe below a
Use vec::filtered().
vec::filter() works only on ~[T] and consumes its argument (so you
cannot use it again) and vec::filtered() does not. This naming
convention is probably too subtle and is also not entirely consistent
across vec functions.
Niko
Peter Ronnquist
Febru
