rust-rfclisted

# rust-rfc Produces a **Request for Comments** in the rust-lang sense: a complete written proposal that argues for a change and specifies it precisely enough to build, authored *before* the work begins so reviewers can reach consensus on the design. An RFC is forward-looking and persuasive; it is not an ADR (which records a decision already taken) and not an issue (which reports a problem without a designed solution). ## The split that defines the genre: guide-level vs reference-level A Rust RFC explains the same feature **twice, for two audiences**. Getting this split right is the whole craft: - **Guide-level explanation** — written as if the feature *already shipped* and you are teaching it to a user. Narrative, example-driven, names the new concepts, shows how it *feels* to use. No desugaring, no edge cases — just the happy path a docs chapter would show. - **Reference-level explanation** — written for the implementer. Precise and exhaustive: desugaring, type rules, grammar/precedence, interaction with existing features, corner cases, error behavior. If the guide section says "and it just works," this section says exactly *how*. Same feature, two altitudes. If a reader can use the feature from the guide section and build it from the reference section, the split is correct. ## Pattern (industry: rust-lang RFC template, 0000-template.md) 1. **Summary** — one paragraph: what is being proposed. 2. **Motivation** — why; the concrete problem, who hits it, why