Yes, I started off with the idea that Rue's syntax would be a strict subset of Rust's.

I may eventually diverge from this, but I like Rust's syntax overall, and I don't want to bikeshed syntax right now, I want to work on semantics + compiler internals. The core syntax of Rust is good enough right now.

▲

scuff3d an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Out of interest, what's the motivation? What are you hoping to do with Rue that Rust doesn't currently provide?

▲

emerent 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How is it a subset then if it has the @-prefix? Wait, does Rust's grammar still have the @ and ~ sigils from the pre 1.0 times for pointers?

	▲	steveklabnik 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It started off that way, but didn't (and won't) remain that way. I'm using @ for intrinsics because that's how Zig does it and I like it for similar reasons to how Rust uses ! for macros.