Niko Matsakis

> At least I would find it harder to speak up after the FCP has already started. This is unfortunate! The whole point of the FCP is to be sure...

@Yokinman that's an interesting idea. It's definitely true that `use impl` syntax gives us more room to generalize it to further contexts.

My preference: In a future edition, make enum variants private by default. There is also however the challenge of tuple structs. I think `pub Struct(T)` should *probably* make the `.0`...

@rfcbot fcp merge We discussed this in today's meeting and agreed that this split looked like what we asked for, with the intent being to gain more specific feedback. We...

@rfcbot reviewed I thought at first there were backwards compatibility concerns here. But as I dug in, I realized that there isn't. Looking at this example that Mara gave: ```rust...

@alexcrichton can you clarify the impact of stabilizing these items? What impact does it have on what *Rust code* people are allowed to write? Do these affect the quality of...

In particular I am also trying to figure out if this is T-compiler, T-lang, or *both* in terms of who needs to commit to stabilization.

@rfcbot fcp merge I am going to assume that this is both a lang and compiler RFC, and hence I move to merge, based on what @alexcrichton had to say...

I'm not inclined to re-record the videos -- that's a lot of work -- but I am convinced this issue is not especially important. Perhaps in future videos I'll include...

I'm trying to figure out exactly what you are proposing. It seems like there are two independent things at play. The first is the handling of `Drop` -- the current...