perfectmotherfuckingwebsite VS swift-evolution

>However, the expectations for a statically generated site have drastically gotten higher over the years. Readers want (rich) content served fast

No, readers just want content served fast. Nothing beyond simple markdown or static html with some images or video embeds inside.

>Writers want dead simple (but expressive) writing and publishing. They want control over how their writing looks.

Who are those "writers"? If you're making a "static site as a service" perhaps that's a concern.

If you're making your own static site, you can use the simplest Markdown or whatever else you prefer, writing it manually, with or without a generator. You could even use the Motherfucking Website standard (https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/) or the Better Motherfucking Website RFC (http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/) or the Best Motherfucking Website recommendations (https://thebestmotherfucking.website/) or go fancy and use the cutting edge Perfect Motherfucking Website ones (https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/).

Well in that case you may want to see this then this

⁠https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/

[A Vision for Embedded Swift](https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/visions/e...) has the details on this new build mode and is quite interesting.

> Effectively, there will be two bottom layers of Swift, and the lower one, “non-allocating” Embedded Swift, will necessarily be a more restricted compilation mode (e.g. classes will be disallowed as they fundamentally require heap allocations) and likely to be used only in very specialized use cases. “Allocating” Embedded Swift should allow classes and other language facilities that rely on the heap (e.g. indirect enums).

Also, this seems to maybe hint at the Swift runtime eventually being reimplemented in non-allocating Embedded Swift rather than the C++ (?) that it uses now:

> The Swift runtime APIs will be provided as an implementation that’s optimized for small codesize and will be available as a static library in the toolchain for common CPU architectures. Interestingly, it’s possible to write that implementation in “non-allocating” Baremetal Swift.

I may be out of my depth here as I've only casually used Rust, but this seems similar to Swift's proposed lifetime dependencies[1]. They're not in the type system formally so maybe they're closer to poloneius work

[1]: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/3055becc53a3c3...

Swift recently adopted a region-based approach for safe concurrency that builds on Milano et al’s ideas: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals...

No, it's not. Refcounting CAN be a garbage collection algorithm, but in Swift it's deterministic and done at compile time. Not to mention recently added support for non-copyable types that enforces unique ownership: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals...

You can stackallocate buffers with unsafe Swift but it's not exactly fun to use. https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals/0322-temporary-buffers.md

If the docs do not suffice, read the concurrency proposals of Swift Evolution. The authors describe the semantics in a very detailed way there.