3 ms·
Technically true, but very misleading in Rust's case. In Rust you rarely have to break retain cycles in the first place, simply because you don't use reference
by pcwalton 10y ago
Technically true, but very misleading in Rust's case. In Rust you rarely have to break retain cycles in the first place, simply because you don't use reference counting much. Things like "weak self" are not a problem, because closures aren't reference counted unless you explicitly make them so (and in fact I don't think I've ever seen a reference counted closure in practice).
- pjmlp 10y agoI agree. I only mentioned Rust, because of ergonomics, since the compiler cannot guide the user unless the types are known. Or is already something in place to make use of intrisics for better error messages in such cases, instead of just giving a type error?