Ah, sorry, my bad, I should have read the whole thread in detail first instead of just skimming it. (: So do you also intend to completely disallow mutation? B

Ah, sorry, my bad, I should have read the whole thread in detail first instead of just skimming it. (: So do you also intend to completely disallow mutation? Because that's the only way I could see this matching Rust's safety guarantees without actually having a borrow checker. Say, for example, that you allocate a new string, and you take a reference to it, and then you append to that string within the same scope. This triggers a reallocation which will make that reference invalid. To make that safe you'd either need to have a borrow checker (to be able to detect at compile time that the reference was invalidated), or you'd have to disallow mutation (the act of mutating wouldn't actually mutate that string, but create a new one, leaving the old one alone until it goes out of scope).