Andrew Paseltiner
Andrew Paseltiner
I also approve, though there is definitely value in enforcing conventions and upkeep through a single repo. A GitHub organization might be useful.
Hmm. It may make more sense to have separate crates for maps and sets after all, mainly because `tree` doesn't really mean anything on its own. For example, if the...
@Gankro: Another crate name option for migrating `{TreeMap, TreeSet}` is simply `bst`, with the types being moved to `bst::{Map, Set}`.
I'd also be fine keeping the lifetime parameter on `EntryMap` but removing it from `{Occupied, Vacant}`, at least until we get higher-kinded types: ``` rust pub trait EntryMap Entry; }...
This also needs to take object-safety into account. It would be nice to be able to use these traits with objects.
The current formulation only works for maps that contain `'static` data.
The new formulation solves the problems of the original without higher-kinded types or associated lifetimes, but instead uses trait objects.
@johnivdel Is this still something we're considering?
This has been implemented via `Attribution-Reporting-Register-Trigger`.