Dude, you are amazing. If the rust people are serious about anything, they should support you as much as they can. You got it all right. Really all. QBE, C wit

Dude, you are amazing. If the rust people are serious about anything, they should support you as much as they can. You got it all right. Really all. QBE, C without extensions (you should lock the code to C99-ish though, or you will have kiddies introducing ISO C feature creeps then planned obsolescence into your C code on the long run). C without extensions... where the linux kernel failed hard (and tons of GNU projects... like the glibc): it should have plain assembly replacement (and I mean not using any C compiler inline assembler) and that should compile out-of-the-box with a mere SDK configuration option. This will be a nearly perfect binary seed for the rust programing language, but you are using QBE, then you get some optimizations... guess what... I did my benchmarks (very basic) with CPROC/QBE and I get ~70% of the speed of latest gcc (tinyCC is 2 times slower than gcc, but its generated assembly code is "neat"/"clean"). All that to say, maybe this project will much more than a binary seed if it becomes a "real life" rust compiler. The main issue though is the rust syntax itself: heard it is not that stable/finished, and it is on the way to that abomination of c++ syntax complexity. When I tried to read some of latest real life rust syntax, I did not understand anything, and I code mainly C (c++ when I was young brain-washed fool), assembly (rv64/x86_64), this is bad omens. Oh, and don't forget to provide statically linked binaries for various platforms, you know: the binary seed.