[Pitch] Non-Escapable Types and Lifetime Dependency

This might also suggest that (A) borrowing -> B and (A) inout -> B/ (A) mutating-> B imply that the function is ~Escapable because it captures its entire context either immutable or mutably by reference.

1 Like

A post was merged into an existing topic: [Pitch #2] Lifetime dependencies for non-Escapable values

Sorry, I just realized there's a new thread.

@John_McCall could you please move my last comment to [Pitch #2] Lifetime dependencies for non-`Escapable` values?

Done. I'll close this for clarity.

1 Like