joshring2

It is different yes, having read a good amount of it by now I find it work's pretty well in practice. It means you can incrementally adopt them if you like and code with or without them looks quite similar assuming you documented your code, the function signatures look the same as well which I appreciate.

C3 benefits from focusing more on the problem at hand than language complexities.

There are definitely advantages to simpler tools, you can streamline development and make people more productive quicker. Compare that scenario to C++ where you first have to agree the features you're allowing and then have to police that subset throughout on every PR.

Community support in C3 is massive, as you can use C libraries directly, it might parallel or exceed Rust on that metric, and the barrier to adding native C3 wrappers or versions is significantly lower too.

Rust is solving a different problem, that of safety over all else. C3 on the other hand is more akin to developer experience above all else.

If you find something that should be easier to do in C3, that's a bug.

As far as I am aware, they support open source as part of their marketing campaign, smart move in my view and helps grass roots projects, Win win.

> Question about optional debug traps

Contracts are available in safe mode, which can optionally be enabled for optimised builds as-well, yes.

> Does language help parallel/concurrent programs to be more readable?

There's active interest in working in this area, if you're interested to help you're welcome to suggest or contribute.

Unfortunately those things often come down to a chicken and egg scenario. Popular things get more popular, because they have demand, people write articles and then people visit the repo, write books etc they are strongly linked.

Looking forward to C3 v0.7. Enjoyed the interview.

If you try it out and have questions, pop them below would be happy to help! Or pop onto the Discord if that's more your thing :)