If Go devs were more welcoming to 1970's programming language research, there would be even less reasons to use Rust.

Many folks reach for it, because it is the only ML like language that they are aware of, and not necessarily due to the borrow checker.

On the other hand, Rust could have by now, the same kind of interpreters/JIT alternative implementations that OCaml, Standard ML, F#, Scala, Haskell enjoy, some of them for at least 30 years.

▲

imtringued 16 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm curious. Is there anything stopping someone from building a Rust to Go compiler?

	▲	pjmlp 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The problem lies in the details of language semantics, or standard library, that you cannot as easily make use of on Go, some of which might require straight Assembly, or a kind of "Rust on Go runtime" helper library, at which point it is more of an intellectual exercise than anything else. Think of it as, while you can compile C or C++ to JavaScript with asmjs, eventually WebAssembly was a more saner alternative.