3 ms·

I'm not sure what Niko Matsakis means by that comment, but I think it is not exactly about the `unsafe { }` block kind of unsafety. Nothing about the macro_rule

• lomnakkus 12y ago
  The wording makes me think that's it's purely about allowing non-hygienic macros[1] in some sensible way. (At least a quick glance at the Rust book/manual suggests that macros are always hygienic in Rust.) Hygiene is a good default, but it does prevent certain other useful uses of macros. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygienic_macro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygienic_macro
  • dbaupp 12y ago
    It's the opposite: macros currently leak their internals in certain circumstances with unsafe and privacy/name resolution, i.e. are slightly non hygienic (they are properly hygienic with respect to local variables, which is the major advantage of hygiene). The changes would make macros more hygienic in those aspects.