The "no gc" crowd

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 11/10/13 16:32, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> This. And exactly the same for immutable. It's interesting how folks totally
> expect complex types (like containers) to meaningfully work with all 3 qualifiers.

It's not so much that we expect it, as that we might expect that standard 
library types would _have the appropriate design work put in_ so that they would 
"just work" with these qualifiers.  (Admittedly shared is a bit of a special 
case right now that probably needs more work before support is rolled out.)

If you tell me that's an unreasonable expectation then fair enough, but it feels 
pretty bad if e.g. library-implemented number types (big integers or floats, 
rationals, complex numbers, ...) can't from a user perspective behave exactly 
like their built-in counterparts.