> claim that other systems are worse in ways they are not (e.g. with respect to Rust having unsafe blocks)
replyIf considering only "safety", then Fil-C is more safe than any Rust containing unsafe blocks, no? With the usual caveats about whether an abort() is safe.
He claims the system provides memory safety under data races. Does it not?
replyIf you think you like Fil-C but aren’t able to see the specific way in which it’s better than Rust (more comprehensive safety), then what is it that you’re liking?
reply>I've long faulted Rust's use of Result over exceptions
replyWhy?
Not the person you're asking, but result types pessimize code more, add register pressure, use more icache for largely dead code, etc. They're arguably noisier at the source level too.
replyThat said, I've spent too much of my life chasing implicit control flow to accept exceptions. Heck, C++'s "noexcept" is a strong argument against exceptions all by itself.