hrhrdorhrvfbf

I read the post multiple times before commenting. The more I read it the worse it looks.

> Now clearly people are misreading the title

This is so fucking obnoxious. There is no misreading. There is not misunderstanding. Any attempt to spin this as even in part a failure of the reader is so rude.

The title is nonsense. Nobody is misreading it, the author was either willfully misleading for clicks (eww) or was just ignorant (excusable, but they need to own it).

> That is very unfortunate, but chance to fix that title already passed.

…the CMS doesn’t let them edit it? What nonsense is this.

This is a lovely example of what professional communication does NOT look like. Incredibly disingenuous all around.

(I’d love better arena syntax in more languages though. They don’t get enough support.)

Rust’s interface for using different allocators is janky, and I wish they had something like this, or had moved forward with the proposal for the mechanism for making it a part of a flexible implicit context mechanism that was passed along with function calls.

But mentioning the borrow checker raises an obvious question that I don’t see addressed in this post: what happens if you try to take a reference to an object in the temporary allocator, and use it outside of the temporary allocator’s scope? Is that an error? Rust’s borrow checker has no runtime behavior, it only exists to create errors in cases like that, so the title invites the question of how your this mechanism handles that case but doesn’t answer it.