3 ms·
It makes me wonder. If things went differently, and if Rusty always needed this syntax for generic parameters, would the consistency have made the syntax more p
by tooltower 6y ago
It makes me wonder. If things went differently, and if Rusty always needed this syntax for generic parameters, would the consistency have made the syntax more palatable?
- kibwen 6y agoAs in, if declaring generics looked like `fn foo::<T>()` rather than `fn foo<T>`? I dunno, at think at that point you just stop worrying about adhering to the principle of making declaration resemble use.
- tooltower 6y agoI guess I was only thinking of types, where turbofish comes up. E.g. for declaring generics, like `struct Point::<T>`.
- edflsafoiewq 6y agoIMO no. I find even :: by itself unpalatable.