Skip to main content

Sketchy ideas

This page notes some "general plans" for how to extend Dada past the dynamic ownership core we are working on right now. Most of it is very rough. There's been a fair amount of work on the static type system, but it's rather out of date and needs to be synchronized.

Dynamic dada: beyond ownership


pub class Point(our x, our y) {
pub fn manhattan_distance(self, other) -> {
(other.x - self.x).absolute_value() + (other.y - self.y).absolute_value()


  • syntax for a closure: { ... }
  • with arguments: { n -> ... }

Subclassing and pattern matching

Subclassing is permitted, but by default only within the same crate

class Option { }
class None: Option { }
class Some(my value): Option { }

then permits destructuring (in dynamic dada, no exhaustiveness checking)

match option {
None => ...
Some(x) => ... # x is owned

as in Rust you can use leasing

match {
None => ...
Some(x) => ... # x is leased

probably want some way to declare open classes (both to world and to future versions)


my list = [1, 2, 3]
my map = [key: value, ...]

Iterating over classes

for x in list { <takes ownership> }
for x in list.share { <shares the things within> }
for x in { <leases the things within> }

Iterable and iterator

my iterator = list.share.iter()

nondefault constructors

class Foo(
my x,
my y,
) {



oh god I don't know... pub/crate/priv?

I know I like the Rust idea of "private by default"

modules and imports

oh god I don't know

but no pub use please, that makes life very hard

FFI, Rust interop,

gotta figure this out :)

but I want really smooth interop with wasm! that much I know.

Checked dada


my variable: Type = <value>

this is short for

any variable: my Type = <value>

a type is:

Type = Mode ClassName `<` Parameters `>`
Mode = `my`, `our`, `leased`, `our leased` ... need to track lessor
Parameter = Type, Lessor ... figure that stuff out

I'm not sure the exact notation for modes/parameters; I'd like to be able to do from(x) where x is a path to mean "this was given from x, so inherit its mode", that much I know. We probably need the equivalent of lifetime parameters but I'm not thrilled about it, and need a good name for them ("modes"? meh).


  • probably use <>; declare a new generic with type

Idea is that we can do

struct Foo<type T> {


and then later

impl Foo<type T> {


impl Foo<Integer> { 

is this nice? I don't know.


  • generics are always covariant unless annotated with =, which makes them invariant
  • to use a generic type within an atomic field, must be annotated with =
    • alternative: atomic
    • also within fn type parameter lists, if we have those
    • maybe we eventually want a contravariant notation, e.g. in
class Cell<type =T> {


our x: Cell<=int> = ....;
# ^^^^ also here? Not sure.