zlacker

Please, turn this into blogpost. I’ve had very similar feelings for some time.

I tolerate the borrow checker because I want to use Rust’s other features. I think Rust with no borrow checker is much closer to my dream language than it is right now. Rust with an optional borrow checker is in fact even better.

>>giovan+(OP)
What would Rust without a borrow checker look like to you? Syntactic sugar or automatic wrapping of types in Box and Arc as appropriate? auto-cloning of !Copy types?

>>giovan+(OP)
Please feel welcome, GB, to post it wherever you think best, annotated as you see fit, with my blessing.

>>esteba+e3
I’d start from allowing multiple mutable references. Second would probably be something about relaxing lifetimes but I can’t properly articulate it right now.

>>giovan+ei
Start by allowing anything at all: not ignoring it, but reporting it. And continue reporting it, until it is wrapped in "unsafe" or fixed.

It would not be a mistake to report the total number of "unsafe" blocks harbored in the program when it is linked, from all sources, alongside the live borrow violations. Safety, like development, is a process, not an endpoint.