> The largest elephant in the room to address is probably Rust. ...
Breaking this down, I can only find two practical problems the author has with Rust:
- long compile times
- the ownership model ("the borrow checker")
The rest of this paragraph appears to be much more general in nature.
Given that the project is only 58,000 lines of D/C++, it's hard to believe that compile time alone is so bad as to drive a decision toward an experimental language like Jai.
So it appears that the main problem the author has is the ownership model ("the borrow checker"). It would be interesting to know more, but the author does not elaborate.
AFAICT, the Rust compiler can be viewed as enforcing the good practices that C++ developers already recognize. So how can this be an issue at all, especially given the ability break out of the ownership model into unsafe Rust (or use other tricks) if the situation calls for it?
Breaking this down, I can only find two practical problems the author has with Rust:
- long compile times
- the ownership model ("the borrow checker")
The rest of this paragraph appears to be much more general in nature.
Given that the project is only 58,000 lines of D/C++, it's hard to believe that compile time alone is so bad as to drive a decision toward an experimental language like Jai.
So it appears that the main problem the author has is the ownership model ("the borrow checker"). It would be interesting to know more, but the author does not elaborate.
AFAICT, the Rust compiler can be viewed as enforcing the good practices that C++ developers already recognize. So how can this be an issue at all, especially given the ability break out of the ownership model into unsafe Rust (or use other tricks) if the situation calls for it?