One thing I setup in a large TypeScript project is not having type checking errors block outputting JavaScript. We still require all commits that go through PR to pass type checking and even enforce the compiler's script mode, but locally we try to ensure the developers can iterate on an idea as fast as they want and refine later. This system has been well received by all of the developers working on the project.

Yes but if the borrow checker is not enforced people _will_ release unsafe code because the borrow checker was optional. It's sort of like how Go enforces same line curlies. It was a decision made to unify the look of the syntax at it's birth, and unfortunately even a curly bracket enforcement is enough of a deterrent as it limits one's expression regarding personal choice. The designers of these languages have an agenda, and by using their tooling we agree to their idea of wisdom. The alternative is something like C. While fun to write, it's a mistake to use unless every programmer onboard is highly skilled with it's pitfalls

I see that you did not read what I wrote.

I don't think that's fair. I guarantee if what you suggested came to pass there would be projects that swap to debug builds to solve a momentary issue... and never swap back.

How's that a problem is the product works and there's less friction to develop? Let's say it produced buggy code and the cost of not enabling it was great than enabling, am sure projects would enable again..

And users would know this, and make their own choice whether to rely on the project.

Removing agency from users of your program or programming language is not a recipe for success.

You torched the pretense of civil debate by declaring GP wouldn't have written what they did if they had of read your post.

I don't agree with you on this issue or your "recipe for success". The reply was fine.

Easily said, and lets you avoid engaging on substance. Congratulations.

You avoided engaging on the substance of the parent comment in favor of a dismissive remark, and then again avoided engaging on substance when I called you out on your bad behavior. Please don't troll this site.

I am quite familiar with the tactic, often employed on this very site, of pretending to answer something that was not said. It is trolling, and I know better than to engage with it. Complaining about not engaging with trolls is itself trolling, which you have now done twice. Accusing people of trolling for not engaging with trolls is trolling.

You have introduced yourself, and I promise to remember.

No, they read it and rightly saw that if there is any way of getting around the borrow checker, people will just take that route.

We can allow glouwbug to speak for him/herself, if you are right, or quietly and honestly accept the embarrassment, and learn from it.

The easiest way to "get around the borrow checker" is not to use Rust at all. We have evidence of people using it, so they are proof positive that not everyone will "just take that route".

If you meant not everyone, but some people, then yes, we know there are people releasing programs not coded in Rust, many quite successfully.