Hey @T-lang -- design meeting now, see the associated dropbox paper doc
Hey @T-lang -- so I thought that was a really useful meeting -- sufficiently useful that I'm wondering if we should try to continue next week, instead of the planned meeting? (which was about type aliases). The planned meeting might indeed be something we discuss in broad strokes.
I'd also be curious to go back over the notes today -- or perhaps someone else wants to -- and try to summarize some of the key things we identified thus far.
Interestingly, after we talked about the idea of moving the edition lints to warning, @Steve Klabnik independently mentioned the idea
By the way, huge thanks to @Jane Lusby (https://twitter.com/yaahc_) for the summary thread of that meeting. I wish all our meetings had summaries like that. :)
My pleasure :blush:
I'm glad to see that our videos help people.
Thread in question https://twitter.com/yaahc_/status/1252383848828030982?s=19
It's very informal
I wouldn't mind doing similar things in the future
You certainly don't have to commit to doing so, but I would enjoy future such threads. Both because they show how things come across, and because they help convey understanding to a much broader set of people than those who watch the whole videos.
I hadn't seen that thread
@Jane Lusby can that maybe be converted to a kind of PR to the design-meeting-minutes directory of the lang-team repository, by any chance?
I was debating about doing that :)
the existing style seems to be much closer to a transcript than my thread
oh actually they're all different
yolo, gonna basically just post what I wrote for the twitter thread and we can tweek it in the PR based on comments
You probably want to be discussing bigger changes at this early stage though, and this is not one.
That seems reasonable though. Please feel free to tag it for consideration for the edition.
it's tagged on GH at least
Oh, I didn't see that. The mobile version of GitHub didn't show that.
we probably don't want to discuss in too much detail, but I think getting a handle on these sorts of "small changes" is a good idea
So we didn't get to it -- I thiink we should repurpose the upcoming meeting to continue our edition discussions -- @Josh Triplett do you agree? want to update the invitation and maybe send an e-mail?
Tomorrow's meeting, or next week's design meeting (replacing type aliases)?
If folks are prepared for Monday's meeting I would prefer to keep that one, to avoid churn, but if that meeting wouldn't end up happening anyway because people need more time, then by all means let's repurpose it.
I meant the Monday meeting
I don't know if anyone did any prep or not, it was me and @eddyb who would potentially have done it, I haven't had any time though.
Then I think it's yours and @eddyb's call, if you'd like more prep time or if you feel like you could drive that discussion on Monday.
I can update the invites easily enough.
meeting, what meeting?
also what about me?
Today there is a meeting and the scheduled topic was discussing type aliases
But I was proposing that we might use the opportunity to do more top-down planning
I'm going to do a bit of review now to prepare in any case
Not sure what the best place to bring this up is: but @matklad wrote a section on lang changes they'd like to see over an edition boundary to improve IDE performance: https://rust-analyzer.github.io/blog/2020/05/18/next-few-years.html#language-design-for-locality
This seems like it could be relevant to edition planning (:
All of those changes seem reasonable to me, and I'd love to see them. That said, we would need to know how widely they're used.