4 ms·
That comic at the end perfectly sums up my reaction (mostly because I want GATs though :)). I'm not fully sold on Rust's existing async/await implementation bu
by akiselev 5y ago
That comic at the end perfectly sums up my reaction (mostly because I want GATs though :)).
I'm not fully sold on Rust's existing async/await implementation but how would this suggestion even be implemented? It's a massive breaking change on multiple fronts and I don't know how a new edition would paper over the impedance mismatch between the new system and async libraries written in the older edition. Feels like I need another year or two of using async rust in production to even begin to form an opinion on this.
How would this work on embedded? I haven't done embedded since long before I could use async/await or Rust but it sounds like implicit anything (except maybe autoref/deref) is a deal breaker.
- carllerche 5y agoI believe it would be possible to implement using an edition in a way that any *old* code is compatible with new code. Regarding implicitness, a lot in Rust already is implicit (e.g. type inference). Good implicitness only feels weird at first, before we get used to it. I linked to Aaron Turon's article on reasoning footprint, but as a follow up, there is withoutboat's article on "not explicit" that goes into the topic more: https://boats.gitlab.io/blog/post/2017-12-27-things-explicit-is-not/ https://boats.gitlab.io/blog/post/2017-12-27-things-explicit...