mirror of https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs.git
`initialisation` -> `initialization`
This commit is contained in:
parent
0dbf16e544
commit
65211297fd
|
@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ Some of the collection types do not allocate any memory when constructed empty (
|
|||
is no longer required to be a hard error (as it is safe and accepted that these destructors may never run).
|
||||
|
||||
Allowing types with destructors to be directly used in `const` functions and stored in `static`s or `const`s will remove the need to have
|
||||
runtime-initialisation for global variables.
|
||||
runtime-initialization for global variables.
|
||||
|
||||
# Detailed design
|
||||
[design]: #detailed-design
|
||||
|
@ -62,9 +62,9 @@ A `const` item's destructor _will_ run at each point where the `const` item is u
|
|||
# Alternatives
|
||||
[alternatives]: #alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
- Runtime initialisation of a raw pointer can be used instead (as the `lazy_static` crate currently does on stable)
|
||||
- Runtime initialization of a raw pointer can be used instead (as the `lazy_static` crate currently does on stable).
|
||||
- On nightly, a bug related to `static` and `UnsafeCell<Option<T>>` can be used to remove the dynamic allocation.
|
||||
- Both of these alternatives require runtime initialisation, and incur a checking overhead on subsequent accesses.
|
||||
- Both of these alternatives require runtime initialization, and incur a checking overhead on subsequent accesses.
|
||||
- Leaking of objects could be addressed by using C++-style `.dtors` support
|
||||
- This is undesirable, as it introduces confusion around destructor execution order.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue