On 8/8/2016 5:00 PM, Silvio Marijić wrote: > It's great that you are up of this. > I think it will be great to see this one in action. > > I agree that we should separate them into separate RFC-s. > > 2016-08-08 15:51 GMT+02:00 Michał Brzuchalski <mic...@brzuchalski.com>: > >> It is great to hear somone is interested so why not. My lately discussion >> found usefull implementing 3 keywords, such as: >> 1. *immutable* for the functionality you are currently working on. >> 2. *sealed* for the above plus type not changeable. >> 3. *final* for the above plus not being overridable. >> >> But all of them should be implemented in different RFC's starting from >> Immutable because it's base point to toher two keywords. >> Whole idea needs refreshing discussion to clarify idea so it can success. >>
I would like to offer my support. I might not be as familiar as you guys with the C source but if you need anything (e.g. documentation, RFC writing, testing, ...) let me know. -- Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
