Stream: project-ffi-unwind

Topic: rfc feedback

nikomatsakis (Oct 30 2019 at 19:07, on Zulip):

@Kyle Strand I answered your question re: unspecified behavior here

Kyle Strand (Nov 10 2019 at 20:52, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis I'm sorry, I never got around to revisiting the scope discussion in the RFC PR, and now it's about to be merged. Should we stop the merge to revisit the scope verbiage, even though it wasn't formally cited as a blocking concern, or is it okay that the feedbacks in the PR thread didn't really make it in to the RFC text?

nikomatsakis (Nov 11 2019 at 21:03, on Zulip):

I think we can just merge the text in

nikomatsakis (Nov 11 2019 at 21:04, on Zulip):

probably a good idea to do so

Kyle Strand (Nov 11 2019 at 23:44, on Zulip):

Oh, I didn't realize RFC merges are manual; when I sent that message I thought we would be racing against the clock if we wanted to make changes.

Kyle Strand (Nov 11 2019 at 23:45, on Zulip):

I don't think we have verbiage ready-to-go, though, do we?

nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:06, on Zulip):

I forget how "ready to go" my wording was

Kyle Strand (Nov 12 2019 at 15:26, on Zulip):


Kyle Strand (Nov 12 2019 at 15:27, on Zulip):

Let me see how today goes at work; I am hoping to have more time to engage with this project again soon.

Last update: May 27 2020 at 22:55UTC