Devs, please explain how such option could decrease the safety of the language. As it would be just that, an option, an opt-in one.
IMHO it even could increase the safety of Rust. There are some extreme optimizing C++ programmers currently. Yes, they are a small fraction, but they exist. And they may want to switch to Rust too. What would they do in Rust? Use 'unsafe' everywhere? Think about library developers, who may not know how deep in loops their procedures will be used. But if there was such an option, then they could code most stuff as safe; they could enjoy the runtime checks during development, saving lots of debugging time; and switch them off only in the last build. I admit I am very noob in Rust. I do not want to push. I am just curious about your thinking.
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
