Safe C++ proposal is not being continued

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by debo_ on Saturday September 13, 2025 @06:35PM (#45235857)

I think there is room for an ML with a modern toolchain story that just omits Rust's borrow checker and does something more boring. Typescript and Rust have primed a large number of developers to be open to it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by throwawaymaths on Saturday September 13, 2025 @07:28PM (#45236153)

this is kinda the opposite of what i think people really want. they want an LLL with borrow checking without all of the abstractions and baggage you get in rust.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by int_19h on Sunday September 14, 2025 @12:14AM (#45237394)

Most of those abstractions and baggage come from the need to be able to represent and propagate lifetime constraints, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by throwawaymaths on Sunday September 14, 2025 @02:13AM (#45237836)

proc macros? Optional?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by int_19h on Thursday September 18, 2025 @09:12PM (#45296886)

I would agree with macros, but I'm pretty sure that people who want borrow checking are not the ones who'd describe optionals as "baggage".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by zozbot234 on Saturday September 13, 2025 @08:55PM (#45236566)

Isn't ReasonML pretty much that language already? Although the most popular language in that broader niche is probably Golang.

[ Parent | on HN ]