2 ms·
Editions, like for Rust, seems to be a solution. If you add a feature because it's really popular at some point but then decide to remove it, you can. This allo
by Zababa 5y ago
Editions, like for Rust, seems to be a solution. If you add a feature because it's really popular at some point but then decide to remove it, you can. This allows for removing legacy cruft after some time, so newcommers and new codebases don't have to care about it. And it's codified and enforced by the compiler, not "here's a list of what you can use". On the other hand, it creates churn. But you can't have evolution, no cruft and no churn. It's a "pick two out of 3" situation.
- CodesInChaos 5y agoEditions can fix syntax level flaws, but many semantic flaws or flaws in the standard library can't be fixed like that.
- staticassertion 5y agoWhy not?
- steveklabnik 5y agoEditions can only change the very front-end of the compiler, and the standard library must be able to be used in all editions, so it’s not really possible to change on a per-edition basis. There’s only one copy of it globally unlike other Rust packages.
- staticassertion 5y agoGot it - thanks, I'd never really considered that.