Types as const Parameters about lang-team

[rfcbot]

The final comment period, with a disposition to close, as per the review above, is now complete.

As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

[nikomatsakis]

Per the FCP above, closing the issue. Thanks @pthariensflame!

[rustbot]

This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.

[pthariensflame]

Zulip link above is broken; use this one instead.

[scottmcm]

We discussed this in the 2020-10-19 lang team triage meeting.

This sounds like it could be a nice simplification in the future, and the idea of reifying more of the type system into values is interesting. However, this builds on const generics, which are still ongoing. There are also still plenty of unknowns here, like how to use these values to produce items. So like we've been doing with other steps-to-variadic-generics RFCs for now,

@rfcbot close

(As this is a close I'll check the boxes of those who were in the meeting.)

[rfcbot]

Team member @scottmcm has proposed to close this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:

• @cramertj
• @joshtriplett
• @nikomatsakis
• @pnkfelix
• @scottmcm
• @withoutboats

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

[rfcbot]

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔