Stream: t-lang/wg-unsafe-code-guidelines

Topic: meeting-2019-01-10


Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 07 2019 at 18:49, on Zulip):

Something to talk about: adding a writeup for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/56697

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:06, on Zulip):

We gonna meet today @WG-unsafe-code-guidelines?

I haven't found the time to create issues from the enum PR, but I was hoping I can squeeze that in RIGHT NOW

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:06, on Zulip):

Then only if you do that RIGHT NOW :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:07, on Zulip):

Yes let’s meet!

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:07, on Zulip):

Agenda: flexible because I’m on my phone (forgot my us computer adapter somehow)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:08, on Zulip):

well we got some PRs

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:09, on Zulip):

and y'all got a dozen or so validity invariant issues to comment on :P

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:09, on Zulip):

I'm on a conference next week, so I'm not going to be very responsive

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:09, on Zulip):

and as I said above, I'd really like to talk about integer-pointer casts

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:09, on Zulip):

(and not going to be attending the mtg next week)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:09, on Zulip):

oh. well that's a topic we could probably hold a conference about^^

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:10, on Zulip):

strictly speaking our meeting begins in 5 minutes

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:10, on Zulip):

true

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:10, on Zulip):

but maybe we want to dig in, I don't know

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:11, on Zulip):

@RalfJ not inaccurate

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:12, on Zulip):

# Proposed agenda:

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:12, on Zulip):

@Nicole Mazzuca did you want to discuss the details of #56697 or something more "meta", i.e., where a write-up might go?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:13, on Zulip):

(given that a lot of technical discussion occured on the issue/PR -- I think it's an interesting and important question to ask where to "store" that information)

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:13, on Zulip):

kinda both

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:13, on Zulip):

(FWIW IIRC we decided to only have "meta" discussions in these meetings)

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:13, on Zulip):

okay, fair

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

(FWIW IIRC we decided to only have "meta" discussions in these meetings)

(I do think that is preferred)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

I'm mostly saying that because I have to leave on time :P

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

ok, well, it's 11:15 anyway

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

@avadacatavra did you say you were on your phone?

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

Yup

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

they did

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:14, on Zulip):

So how many prs do we have

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

I think I forgot to clean up and change labels last werk

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

fn ptrs: https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/45

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

ok let's look

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

Week

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

a lot, 8

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

no update from what I can see

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

um

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

I can't connect to github...

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:15, on Zulip):

er, now it's working, weird

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:16, on Zulip):

hm. I can.

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:16, on Zulip):

yeah, so re: #45, @Nicole Mazzuca do you think you'll have time to update? we were supposed to discuss last week and I sort of semi-volunteered to help but failed utterly

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:16, on Zulip):

yeah, I can actually do it this morning

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

Are any ready to merge?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

not quite

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

next up would be #57; I am supposed to open a few issues and reference them. I haven't tbh looked closely at @gnzlbg's suggestons

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

I will try to do that post meeting and then we can merge I think

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

I think I just have to fix the 'static lifetime thing, right?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:17, on Zulip):

I think I just have to fix the 'static lifetime thing, right?

I think so, yes

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

well there's https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/45#issuecomment-439604001

Alan Jeffrey (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

:wave:

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

Hi Alan!

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

which was kind of off-thread a bit, but @Nicole Mazzuca you raised those questions here

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

but it's way outside of representation/validity

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:18, on Zulip):

sounds more like the same meta question as the int ptr casts -- where does such stuff go?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:19, on Zulip):

and I'd think the answer is "same as my stacked borrows". whatever that means.^^

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:19, on Zulip):

I think it might be "we should put this somewhere in 'questions to answer in the far future, with our current thoughts'"

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:19, on Zulip):

but it's way outside of representation/validity

I agreed with what you wrote in that comment, @RalfJ

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:19, on Zulip):

hmm

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

I'd just prefer if we didn't lose that comment so I don't have to write it again^^

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

Do we need some sort of “other” section to record things like this that will be integrated in once we have more write ups on more topics

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

hm I guess theere's a difference to stacked borrows, in that this is something we have conseus on

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

“Profound thoughts to revisit” :yum:

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

I mean normally we open issues on this sort of thing

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

whereas stacked borrows is just me doing stuff

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

so we could open an issue with links and/or copies of ralf's comment

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

and leave a link to the issue in the text or something like that

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:20, on Zulip):

Let’s do that

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

well issues are for questions

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

we got some answers here

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

just outside the discussion area(s)

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

Hmmm...

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

I mean

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

not until we decide it

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

fair, some proposed answers. sounds like a PR.

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:21, on Zulip):

it feels like we have a question that we think we know the answer to :)

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:22, on Zulip):

I mean the alternative is to edit the PR to contain that information now

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:22, on Zulip):

no that sounds wrong

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:22, on Zulip):

so yeah issue sounds good

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:22, on Zulip):

^ :+1:🏿

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:22, on Zulip):

so shall we post a summary comment to #45 for posterity listing the things to be done

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:23, on Zulip):

Yes please

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:23, on Zulip):

We can also do a meta issue for follow ups if we wanted to

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:23, on Zulip):

or a label

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis are you writing that summary?

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

When you create the issue can you ping me here with a pointer

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/45#issuecomment-453157875

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

yes, I am done

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

next, https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/59

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

no comment aside from a grammar mit

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:24, on Zulip):

so, can we merge after I resolve that nit?

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:25, on Zulip):

Wfm

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:25, on Zulip):

okay, will do later tonight

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:25, on Zulip):

I actually have a question about the enum repr -- though it's only half meta

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:25, on Zulip):

I'll also open up the issue on int->ptr casts

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:25, on Zulip):

@gnzlbg mentioned opening an issue about whether we are willing to guarantee that enum Foo { bar } has zero size

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

I guess I have to check if we said anything of the kind for structs

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

nm, I'll do a bit of research. It feels like the sort of thing we ought to guarantee, I think.

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

it does

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

I would open up an issur

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

To record that you’re looking into it

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

And go for it

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

I may just redirect to the existing issue on zero-sized structs

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:26, on Zulip):

#37

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

Wfm

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

er, the links are broken here, annoying

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

but yeah ok

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

zero-sized ADTs, then?^^

Alan Jeffrey (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

Do we guarantee that enum Foo { bar(Bar) } has the same repr as Bar?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

(I should add a zulip shortcut like ucg/#22...)

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

Do we guarantee that enum Foo { bar(Bar) } has the same repr as Bar?

I don't think I said that, but I was wondering the same thing just now

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

@Alan Jeffrey unlikely

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

Do we guarantee that enum Foo { bar(Bar) } has the same repr as Bar?

that seems analogous to single-field structs

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

There is actually a related issue

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

yes, that

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:27, on Zulip):

:)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

"single-field ADTs"

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

we could do it, but I doubt it's a guarantee right now

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

maybe i'll just open an issue about the relationship between univariant enums and structs

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

we could do it, but I doubt it's a guarantee right now

in what sense? I don't think the compiler ever lays them out differently

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

(that is, i'm interested if you think there is an exception, but you can leave it on the thread)

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:28, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis no I mean it's literally just not a guarantee

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

Yes please :)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

next: https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/61

just adding an example of an optimization we might want to do

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

Ready for merge?

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

like, no one has actually done the thing to make it a guarantee

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

fine for me

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

seems good, let's merge

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:29, on Zulip):

Perfect. Any other prs ready for merge?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:30, on Zulip):

well what about https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/64 ?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:30, on Zulip):

it's not meant to get consensus

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:30, on Zulip):

just to get a place for the document

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:30, on Zulip):

no comment at all so far, but it's also a lot of text

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:30, on Zulip):

I think we should merge it

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

it feels like this repo is the right home for this sort of thing

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

Yeah I like having a wip section

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

I was hoping for feedback along the lines of "this part is not understandable, please clarify"

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

but that can easily come later as well

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

I was hoping for feedback along the lines of "this part is not understandable, pelase clarify"

leave, feedback on the text itself?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

I confess I've not read it :)

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

@RalfJ I'll do that

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

I can try to publicize it more

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

Or at least I forget if I did

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

See if we can get some more eyes on it

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

but yeah we can give that sort of feedback

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

maybe edit the subject too

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:31, on Zulip):

okay, let's leave it open for now then to incorporate what might come

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

e.g., "[Edits Requested]" or something

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

That would be a good label

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

isnt that implicit in all PRs?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

or a label

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

I don't think so

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

I thought it was

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

I mean yes but I feel like the sense is different

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

the difference is that here it's only edits requested

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

nothing else

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:32, on Zulip):

I think it can be nice to be explicit about that

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

we're mostly interesting in making sure the text can be understood, right?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

ack

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

yes

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

not necessarily debating its full implications

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

yes. "edits requested" doesnt say that to me.

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

(and certainly not deciding "whether or not to adopt stacked borrows")

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

In particular if you’re looking for understandability and clarity. I know for me I wouldn’t necessarily suggest an edit on it because it’s not my area if you didn’t explicitly say “readability comments requested” or something

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

maybe we can find a way to clarify it

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

maybe just put it in the PR heading

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:34, on Zulip):

"edit for readibility plz"

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:34, on Zulip):

I will delete the pr if you spell out please instead of plz :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:35, on Zulip):

Ok perfect. What was next on the agenda? Is that all the pr discussion to have?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:35, on Zulip):

I will delete the pr if you spell out please instead of plz :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:

well I am going to try you on that :P

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:35, on Zulip):

I used plz quite specifically :P

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

ok, pick a label, it's all on you Ralf. "Ralf Ralf, they're our person! If they can't do it, nobody can."

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

Next up: https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/66

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

Make validity the active area of discussion

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

does what it says on the tin

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

I think we are ready

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

Merge merge merge

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:37, on Zulip):

we even got issues. :P

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:37, on Zulip):

![let's do this](https://media2.giphy.com/media/zaezT79s3Ng7C/200w.webp?cid=3640f6095c3774af547a5666326499a3)

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:37, on Zulip):

man it is disappointing how zulip renders that

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:37, on Zulip):

We need a gif bot for our repo

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:38, on Zulip):

yeah, I really wish it replaced it by a still.^^

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:38, on Zulip):

Just for ralf

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:38, on Zulip):

but well, I got the firefox debug tools for that :P

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:38, on Zulip):

so let's merge the PR, who will adjust labels? "We then also need new labels.", @RalfJ says

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:38, on Zulip):

(I can't read text if ther's something moving next to it, my eyes just always move away)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

I gave us a new topic-valid or so label

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

do we need anything else?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

seems fine

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/67

Use layout consistently instead of mixing it with representation

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

:ship:

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

Good to go?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

should the old issues from topic-repr keep their "active discussion area" label?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

:ship:

?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

"ship it"

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

No we should change them to something

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

oh

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

lol :D

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

should the old issues from topic-repr keep their "active discussion area" label?

remove them I think

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

Idk what yet because lack of caffeine

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

I mean just no label I think is fine..?

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

Should we have a meta bug for revisiting that we put things like that in

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

we can just have a list of "topics we discussed already", I guess... ?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

"previous discussion area"?^^

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

Like topic-repr revisiting and list them and not have them labeled then

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

I feel confused

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

we have the topic-repr label

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

not sure what more you are asking?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

I would think that they should stay labeled topic-repr, and we should just list that topic under "previous topics" somewhere

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

Ok that works

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

I’m in California so...I haven’t had tea yet lol

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

they all ave writeup-needed or open-question or writeup-assigned

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

Ok then we’re good to go with just removing the active label

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

done, label removed

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/68

Fix mdbook build, add travis-ci, and publish book #68

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

so for the renaming PR, do we all agree that's a better term? @avadacatavra , @Alan Jeffrey ?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

oh, I merged it already :P

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

(I am fairly sure @Nicole Mazzuca agrees^^)

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

oh well. nvm then^^

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

I feel like we've discussed it a few times before

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

Lol

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

Wfm

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

but of course we can revert..

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

move fast and break things or whatever they say

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/pull/68

Fix mdbook build, add travis-ci, and publish book #68

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

I think this seems .. uncontroversial

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

once it is rebased etc, if it works, let's do it :+1:

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

I dont know mdbook, can't say much about the technical details

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

but assuming someone took care of that, :passenger_ship:

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

I've done this sort of thing before, I can work with @gnzlbg and get the token up

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

I hate it every time, but I did do it before :P

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

@RalfJ what do I agree with? representation -> layout?

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

@Nicole Mazzuca yes

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

you kind of triggered that rename

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

Is that all the prs now?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

that's it

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

it is

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

it's also 11:45

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

and it's also 1745

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

^^

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

(in the "one true time zone")

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

cool, wfm

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

in the one true time zone, it's 8:46

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

# Proposed agenda:

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

we actually kind of settled all of this but the last point I think?

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

good job team!

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:46, on Zulip):

well we're done with item 1 and the mtg is over...^^

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

no, I mean, we handled issues and #56697 "en passante"

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

there's like 40 open issues, wouldn't know that we reviewed them but well^^

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

I think we did a decent job of discussing most but the last

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

I can open a topic on the last "meta question" point, we can discuss a bit async perhaps (or maybe an internals thread)

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

probably the latter

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

yeah. having the book deployed will help with that.

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

Agreed

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

there's like 40 open issues, wouldn't know that we reviewed them but well^^

yeah ok we didn't do that :)

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

Especially now that we’re on topic 2

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:48, on Zulip):

all right, I got to go. see you all!

RalfJ (Jan 10 2019 at 16:48, on Zulip):

as I said I wont be attending next week, will be on a conference in Lisbon

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:48, on Zulip):

have fun

avadacatavra (Jan 10 2019 at 16:48, on Zulip):

And I will charge my computer somehow and try to make a summary!

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:49, on Zulip):

nice

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 16:49, on Zulip):

charging is recommended

Nicole Mazzuca (Jan 10 2019 at 16:51, on Zulip):

my cat has other ideas on whether I'll be doing fn ptrs -.-

nikomatsakis (Jan 10 2019 at 17:29, on Zulip):

I opened issues and merged the enums PR

gnzlbg (Jan 13 2019 at 12:15, on Zulip):

I've done this sort of thing before, I can work with @gnzlbg and get the token up

I also hate generating github tokens every time. I've rebased the PR, I think we can merge it without a token, and @nikomatsakis can add a token later when they generate it.

Last update: Nov 19 2019 at 17:35UTC