Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upMove some net2 functionality into libstd #1461
Conversation
sfackler
added
the
T-libs
label
Jan 13, 2016
sfackler
force-pushed the
sfackler:net2
branch
from
bfdce83
to
a9b9aeb
Jan 13, 2016
alexcrichton
assigned
sfackler
Jan 13, 2016
sfackler
force-pushed the
sfackler:net2
branch
from
a9b9aeb
to
7aa647f
Jan 26, 2016
aturon
added
the
I-nominated
label
Feb 10, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Please don't everyone comment all at once! More seriously, though, the libs team is interested specifically in diving into the landing strategy for this in libstd, either:
My own personal opinion is that we should land these as insta-stable. The APIs have been vetted in net2-rs for quite some time now, and I don't think we'd really gain all that much more use through another round of FCP for the APIs. Curious what others think though! |
alexcrichton
added
final-comment-period
and removed
I-nominated
labels
Feb 11, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
briansmith
commented
Feb 13, 2016
|
I don't think these should be added via traits. Over time, the standard library would become a ridiculous mess of such traits as new functionality is added, if it were to follow that pattern. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The traits would only exist until the methods were stabilized. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The libs team discussed this during triage yesterday and the conclusion was to merge this RFC adding these methods as insta-stable. Thanks for the RFC @sfackler! |
alexcrichton
referenced this pull request
Feb 18, 2016
Closed
Tracking issue for adding some net2 methods to std #31766
alexcrichton
merged commit 7aa647f
into
rust-lang:master
Feb 18, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
We're going to hold off on the implementation until just after the next release to allow for the longest possible time before these hit a stable release and are locked in forever. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
How about simply not making them insta-stable? That to me sounds better than delaying the landing. |
sfackler commentedJan 13, 2016
Rendered