srrrse

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) I think this is a great and sensible solution to the problem that self-referential future bodies raised, and in retrospect an obviously missing API addition. I'm curious...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) I'm very enthusiastic about adding something like this to the language, and there's nothing in this RFC I don't like. I don't have a strong opinion about...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) > Less clear to me is the interaction with pinning. That could be a big deal. I personally feel that we want generators to work exactly like...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) > @withoutboats I remember you were blogging about that -- let me go read up. I agree it's a hard technical problem, but I'm not ready to...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) I think there are several good arguments for replacing `->` with something like `yield` or `yields`. I'm pretty much just summarizing here: - Educational: it helps users...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) @dead-claudia The problem with that is that it's considered undesirable to have the signature based on the body of the function (other auto traits like `Send` are...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) I'm not convinced that making yoke sound is the best approach to solving the problem of "self-borrowing." I think yoke and rental and so on are unsatisfactory...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) @sgrif What you put in quotes is not what I wrote. I don't understand why you reframe what I wrote as something more dismissive and then criticize...

(NOT A CONTRIBUTION) > I think this statement is perfectly valid but I think it makes your previous one irrelevant to the discussion when said in the same breath as...

I don't think this feature sounds very useful for its stated purpose. I wouldn't describe this syntax as "slightly less nice" than actually having these reserved as keywords; I would...