Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fallout from Sound Generic Drop to be addressed later #22321

Closed
3 of 6 tasks
pnkfelix opened this issue Feb 14, 2015 · 3 comments
Closed
3 of 6 tasks

fallout from Sound Generic Drop to be addressed later #22321

pnkfelix opened this issue Feb 14, 2015 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
A-destructors Area: Destructors (`Drop`, …) C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. metabug Issues about issues themselves ("bugs about bugs")

Comments

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

pnkfelix commented Feb 14, 2015

This is meant as a meta-bug for me to collect references to places where users complained about fallout from Sound Generic Drop (#21972) and its precursors (namely #21657 in particular).

It might be a places to pose ideas for ways to address complaints, but keeping in mind the distinction between language features versus tooling, I would prefer for the comments on this ticket to focus on things we can do without changing the language per se, and try to put language changes somewhere on the RFC repo. For example, ways to encode "this destructor for this type is pure" is an example of such a language feature.

(I do not know where something like "borrow scopes should not always be lexical" (#6393) falls in that categorization; that might be an example of something that would not require an RFC, but maybe it does at this point.)


Potential work items:


key terms: destruction scope, block suffix, unsafe_destructor

@pnkfelix pnkfelix changed the title fallout from Sound Generic Drop that to be addressed later fallout from Sound Generic Drop to be addressed later Feb 14, 2015
@pnkfelix pnkfelix self-assigned this Feb 14, 2015
@pnkfelix pnkfelix added the A-destructors Area: Destructors (`Drop`, …) label Feb 14, 2015
@huonw huonw added the metabug Issues about issues themselves ("bugs about bugs") label Feb 14, 2015
@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Triage: I'm not totally sure this metabug is useful; @pnkfelix what do you think?

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member Author

pnkfelix commented May 2, 2017

@steveklabnik hmm my use of this as a metabug extends beyond just the list of bugs in the description. There are a couple other bugs that cc this one as a way of collecting them, such as #21114.

Having said that, I probably should either update the description to point to the current set of bugs that are still open and relevant, or close this as you suggest.

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. and removed I-wishlist labels Jul 22, 2017
@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member Author

pnkfelix commented Oct 4, 2018

I think everything here is going to end up addressed by NLL or be better tracked by individual tickets.

@pnkfelix pnkfelix closed this as completed Oct 4, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-destructors Area: Destructors (`Drop`, …) C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. metabug Issues about issues themselves ("bugs about bugs")
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants