@dalias @dusk @GossiTheDog maybe that's good news, it will create more jobs on the market and reduce unemployment?

Oh no, companies would rather keep shipping unfixed AI-generated slop than hire more people to fix it...

@fay59 thank goodness we have JIT so that no one dares to litigate how to pronounce Git.

@inthehands @finestructure IMO type safety is as important as memory safety is. Type errors in dynamic languages exposed to users are just as bad as memory corruption bugs. Non-technical users really wouldn't see a difference between "core dumped" and "undefined is not an object", and the end result is the same: frustration.

@sixohsix @Migueldeicaza @ktoso as for Clang modules, you can modularize a library built by any other compiler. A library itself can provide a modulemap file for it, but a library adopter can provide one instead. Libraries you interop with from Swift don't require Clang, they can continue using their favourite C or C++ compiler as they were.

@sixohsix @Migueldeicaza @ktoso Rust doesn't have C++ interop. Yes, 3rd-party libraries in Rust allow C++ bindings generation but that's quite far away from interop in Swift in terms of development experience. With Swift most of C++ declarations (including templates) become available on importing automatically, no binding generation needed. And it works in both directions, C++ code has access to Swift declarations and call into those freely, with calling convention nuances handled automatically.