On Borrow Checking

[jmh530]

On Tuesday, 29 April 2025 at 23:40:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/29/2025 1:40 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> However, I do not agree that `@live` really lives up to them. 
>> It's a borrow-checking-inspired linting tool for primarily 
>> `@system` code. It is not the kind of innovative tool people 
>> are likely to expect to find in the toolbox going forward.
>
> I'm aware that you and I disagree on the details! But I'm 
> reluctant to invest more time on it given the decided general 
> lack of interest in it.
>
> [snip]

I have flashbacks of the recent D hacker news thread where you 
said marketing isn't your strong suit...

You wrote a blog post on ownership and borrowing back in 2019 
(https://dlang.org/blog/2019/07/15/ownership-and-borrowing-in-d/), but it has just a brief mention of @live. Would you want to expand your original post with an emphasis on @live, why to use it, and what it gets you?

Otherwise to your point about lack of interest, my recollection 
is that there has been a lot of discussion over the years about 
safe reference-counting, maybe and allocator-aware container 
libraries (I assume this is possible but limited in ways that 
people aren't happy about). And my sense is that DIP 1000 and 
@live haven't quite gotten us to the place where people want the 
language to be. That could be a driver to the lack of interest.

There are only so many hours in the day, and I'm sure people 
would prefer you polish some other features before focusing on 
this. But I don't think it is unwise to be thinking about these 
issues.