Thank you! I am not questioning it in as casting doubt or making you defend it, I want to learn from it. Targeting a rigorous safe language as the output of a

Thank you! I am not questioning it in as casting doubt or making you defend it, I want to learn from it. Targeting a rigorous safe language as the output of a compiler is wonderful. You get no guarantees when you target C or JS. By targeting Rust, it also makes it natural to embed inside of a Rust macro and weave it into Rust like `inline_python` does. There was a position blog post awhile ago arguing that language designers should target Rust as their compilation target, but a quick search doesn't turn it up. https://docs.rs/inline-python/latest/inline_python/ https://docs.rs/inline-python/latest/inline_python/ *edit, found the post https://willcrichton.net/notes/rust-the-new-llvm/ https://willcrichton.net/notes/rust-the-new-llvm/ > New programming languages with a system-level compile target should choose Rust over LLVM. Targeting Rust can give new languages free package management, a type system, and memory safety while not imposing too many opinions on the language's runtime. With more work on languages, tooling, and Rust compiler development, we can create an ecosystem of beautifully interoperable programming languages.