Jana Dönszelmann
Jana Dönszelmann
@davidhewitt Distributed slice, what you're talking about is actually an open issue in the testing devex team: https://github.com/rust-lang/testing-devex-team/issues/3. I'm currently (slowly) working towards a proposal for that: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/global-registration-a-kind-of-pre-rfc/20813/23. I'm afraid...
How do you deal with the following case? crate A defines an extern function f. crate B imports A and implements f. crate C imports A and implements f. crate...
Can libraries define a new default implementation of an extern function? Something like ```rust // crate A: extern impl fn logger() -> Logger { Logger::to_stdout().with_colors() } // crate B imports...
Simply feature gating these implementations solves a lot of the problems I think.
Just like [global registration](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125119) I don't think you want to implement this feature through the linker, at the very least initially. Personally, I'd be worried about the errors that are...
I didn't know too much more to say specifically on the orphan check, maybe that's not needed as much either. However, I did put it in the broader context of...
(am aware of merge commits, was just an easy way to get those changes in before they're on master so we can run CI on this PR. will obviously remove...
@rustbot review
cc @workingjubilee