[veidr]

No, and there's been a lot of confusion about that on this website.

They did cite Rust's safety as a motivating factor for the port. That doesn't imply trying to achieve that simultaneously with the language change — which is good, because that would be insane. (Or, if you prefer, even more insane.)

You cannot faithfully port a codebase to a new language while also radically re-architecting it. You have to choose.

They want the safety benefits of Rust going forward; i.e., after it's finished, when they then write new code in Rust.

[swiftcoder]

Yeah, exactly. The typical approach is to do a mechanical translation such as with rust2c, that is full of unsafe, and then gradually refactor safety in.

[Dylan16807]

But nobody makes announcements and blog posts about running that.

[pgporada]

There's several blog posts here. https://www.memorysafety.org/initiative/av1/

[Dylan16807]

And the first post is about the team working on the project, with about two and a half sentences on c2rust, and making it very clear they just started.

The newer posts go into detail about the rearchitecting that follows.

[Ar-Curunir]

And indeed, the bun team has not done that

[Dylan16807]

Did they not make the announcement? And they definitely promised a blog post even if it's not out yet.

[Ar-Curunir]

Not on their blog, website, or twitter, so no?