[Kon-Peki]

I'm wondering if what you are asking for is what Swift does - overflow kills your program, but you can opt into allowing it by using "Overflow Operators" (&+, &- and &*).

This crashes in Swift

   var potentialOverflow = Int16.max
   potentialOverflow += 1

This does not crash

   var potentialOverflow = Int16.max
   potentialOverflow &+= 1

[1] https://docs.swift.org/swift-book/LanguageGuide/AdvancedOper...

[LegionMammal978]

As others have mentioned, the default overflow behavior in Rust can be configured to panic. To explicitly wrap around on overflow in every configuration, you can use the newtype wrapper Wrapping, or use the wrapping_add(), wrapping_mul(), etc. methods on the basic integer types. There are also variations such as saturating_op(), checked_op(), and overflowing_op() to detect the overflow and handle it appropriately.

[Kon-Peki]

Sure, I was suggesting that what the OP is asking for is not what Rust does, but what Swift does. This is not a configuration thing, if you don't want a runtime exception on overflow, you must use a different arithmetic operator.

Swift's behavior comes at a cost - it is not exactly the fastest language out there ;) Another no-overflow oddity is that Swift doesn't have a rand() equivalent. You can't get fast psuedorandom numbers in Swift unless you are on the Mac, in which case you can import GameplayKit and get gaming-appropriate pseudorandom numbers.

EDIT - to be clear, I am not suggesting that anyone change their own chosen programming language. But if you'd like, install Swift on your dev machine and make a Swift implementation of the critical section of your Rust code. Debug, optimize, tweak, etc. And you'll get a pretty good idea of what kind of performance you have to give up to do what many people are asking :)