maroider
@maroider.net
The timing on this couldn't have been better. Turns out I needed to export an accessible PDF from my Typst project tonight to hit a deadline. You guys saved me from a lot of trouble. Please forward my appreciation to whoever got it implemented <3
October 10, 2025 at 8:47 PM
The timing on this couldn't have been better. Turns out I needed to export an accessible PDF from my Typst project tonight to hit a deadline. You guys saved me from a lot of trouble. Please forward my appreciation to whoever got it implemented <3
No worries. I would still say that the extra required import is awkward and it can hurt discoverability. I'm not entirely sold on this particular RFC's proposed solution, but I still think it's valuable to attach non-overridable methods to a trait in some form.
October 8, 2025 at 8:59 PM
No worries. I would still say that the extra required import is awkward and it can hurt discoverability. I'm not entirely sold on this particular RFC's proposed solution, but I still think it's valuable to attach non-overridable methods to a trait in some form.
`impl<T: Trait> T {}` isn't valid Rust. What the RFC refers to as an existing alternative is extension traits, which would be `impl<T: Trait> ExtTrait for T {}`. `impl dyn Trait` also only works on trait objects which is awkward.
October 8, 2025 at 6:06 PM
`impl<T: Trait> T {}` isn't valid Rust. What the RFC refers to as an existing alternative is extension traits, which would be `impl<T: Trait> ExtTrait for T {}`. `impl dyn Trait` also only works on trait objects which is awkward.