3 ms·

Yeah, Rust seems to have an ergonomics problem and the only response we are seeing is "you're holding it wrong". I would rather work on interesting projects th

• steveklabnik 8y ago
  > the only response we are seeing is "you're holding it wrong". We had such a huge push last year for ergonomics that there's a segment of the community that's still upset about it. We're very interested in improving them; if you have good ideas about it, you'll get heard out.
  • fooker 8y ago
    Can you point me to a document listing the changes from this effort?
    • steveklabnik 8y ago
      Probably the closest is https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/03/02/lang-ergonomics.html https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/03/02/lang-ergonomics.html, which laid out the plans to do so. That being said, there wasn’t a single real document I can point you to: it was a label attached to a number of RFCs, and not really tracked as one thing. Some stuff that ended up landing under this banner was: Non-lexical lifetimes “Match ergonomics” Implied lifetime bounds The anonymous lifetime The question mark operator Async/await (this one is still in progress) The removal of “extern crate” ... and some other things I’m sure I’ve forgotten. I also said “last year” but that blog post is from 2017, and that’s because it took a long time for RFCs to be created, accepted, implemented, and stabilized; a lot of this stuff landed in the latter half of last year, though some before then too.