Note that this is an April Fool's post, and not even written by the core team :) I find it a little strangely written: although it's meant to be a joke, some o

Note that this is an April Fool's post, and not even written by the core team :) I find it a little strangely written: although it's meant to be a joke, some of the things it mentions are actually true. Improving compilation speed is an important priority, and there is ongoing work on the compiler which includes parallelization. Procedural macros are not going away, but compile-time function evaluation AKA "constant functions" really are another area of work, although compile-time reflection hasn't been proposed (but I'd personally love to see it). Tokio really has been criticized for being complex and having confusing error messages; nobody is switching to an actor system, but AIUI newer versions have tried to simplify the API. Dependent types are not on the table, but "enum Option<T, bool>" sort of seems like an example of const generics, which are a real upcoming feature... though the inside of the enum looks like an attempt to write a GADT, another feature Rust doesn't have, but not the same thing as dependent types. It seems like the author may actually be trying to make jabs at Rust, by negatively comparing it to various other languages regarding procedural macros, concurrency, and compilation time, as well as criticizing match ergonomics (which were a real source of controversy). Specifically, it makes mostly false claims that Rust is planning to be more like those languages in those areas, and to remove match ergonomics. But it also invents changes which would obviously be bad, like not caring about documentation and testing, or releasing a Rust 2.0 (which would violate Rust's stability goals). So... is it meant to be a wishlist or a list of bad ideas? A bit of a muddled message.