@ricci Be careful with your wording. It *suggests* the existence of hardware, amirite? (I’m currently writing an ACM conference paper.)

@ekuber @burakemir Got it; thanks. I was thinking that “;” was like an operator of type T1 → T2 → T2 and imagining the type-checker was somehow producing the error if T1 was “!”, and this just led to more confusion. I was wrong.

@ekuber @burakemir Cool. So loop {}; loop {} fails to type-check? That’s very nice, although I do feel sorry for the poor compiler having to emit an understandable error message that doesn’t mention type-checking….

@ekuber @burakemir I just wanted to make sure there’s nothing ultra-subtle going on here. If we define fn f(x: T) → T = f(x), excusing my syntax, that’s okay, right? So you can do *something* with x in that function instead of just returning it? (I’m about to leave on vacation, which might be my best next step….)

@burakemir I’m a little confused, but I’m not a real type-systems guy. The post says “There is nothing else you can do with a value of an unknown type except give it back.” It could return bottom, right? (I would imagine Rust doesn’t have a bottom value, of course, except for looping forever?)

@wisegreyowl I got the app and read through a bunch of free articles to see if I liked it—SO many that I was quickly told I’d run out of free articles until next month. I’ll be in London weekend after next, so maybe I’ll just pick up a paper copy of The Economist at a news stand to help me decide whether to subscribe….

@wisegreyowl I used to subscribe to The Economist’s print edition, decades ago. Now that print is dead, of course, I’d have to restart it online. Thanks!

(There is no Unicode emoji for “plum”—not yet.)