rust-lang/rfcs#3874 has finished FCP and is due to be merged any day now. I'm working on resolving the remaining open comments on rust-lang/rfcs#3875 and then intend to nudge the reviewers to have a look and check their boxes or leave concerns.

Adam Gemmell has opened rust-lang/cargo#16675 with an early sketch of some of the core changes that build-std would require and is working with the Cargo team to address feedback and work out how to proceed with the implementation.

Update this cycle is the same as last time - rust-lang/rfcs#3874 and rust-lang/rfcs#3875 are progressing, with feedback being addressed and checkboxes checked, and we're still working out what the implementation would look like.

No major updates this cycle - we're still working through feedback on rust-lang/rfcs#3874 and rust-lang/rfcs#3875 and prototyping the implementation to be prepared.

Key developments: What has happened since the last time.

In the last month, I've:

• met with the lang team, Crubit team, and cxx author, and Joel and Mara have met with the C++ standards working group
• expanded the some draft high-level problem statement summaries, and added code examples
• added 6 new interop use cases
• added more relationships between problems/use cases and existing project goals & unstable compiler features
• prepared for the Rust All Hands, and started mentoring for Outreachy

Specifically, the last month we've identified and prioritised two high-priority use cases for more detailed work:

• calling an overloaded C++ function from Rust, with a Rust lang experiment - implementation discussion
• adding Rust to an existing C++ build system, this currently works for basic cases, but the tooling could be improved on the Rust side

And I analysed the problems / use cases we've collected so far, with priorities, responsible language, and a split into semantics or tooling changes.

Blockers: List any Rust teams you are waiting on and what you are waiting for.

Nothing at the moment, everyone has been extremely helpful, and I'm getting good feedback on use cases, problems, priorities, and Rust language experiments.

Help wanted: Are there places where you are looking for contribution or feedback from the broader community?

Suggestions for more interop use cases or problems would be very welcome, just open a discussion in t-lang/interop and I'll turn it into a ticket. Or go ahead and open a use case or problem ticket directly.

Next step is continuing to work on overloading and build systems in more detail. If you have specific Rust/C/C++ build system blockers, please open a chat or ticket.

I'll post an update here every few weeks, you can follow more detailed weekly updates on Zulip.

Hi, I'm the new contractor on the interop problem space mapping project goal.

Key developments: What has happened since the last time. It's perfectly ok to list "nothing" if that's the truth, we know people get busy.

In the last week and a half, I've:

• added some draft high-level problem statement summaries
• started mapping out interop use cases
• added relationships between problems/use cases and existing project goals & unstable compiler features

Blockers: List any Rust teams you are waiting on and what you are waiting for.

Nothing at the moment, still working through the high level mapping of the problem space.

Help wanted: Are there places where you are looking for contribution or feedback from the broader community?

Suggestions for more interop use cases would be very welcome, just open a discussion in t-lang/interop and I'll turn it into a ticket. Or go ahead and open a use case ticket directly.

Next step is prioritising a few of the use cases, then working on related problem statements in more detail.

I'll post an update here every few weeks, you can follow more detailed weekly updates on Zulip.

The effort to fill the contracting role to support this project goal is in the process winding down. The interview and discussion process is nearly complete. We expect to make a final decision for the role in early February.

• Key developments:
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/153693, self-reviewed, and found that the current approach of handling pinned borrows may be incorrect, as it failed to distinguish a pinned borrow from a coercion of a normal-to-pinned reference. The latter doesn't prevent a T: Unpin type from being moved, but the former does, which breaks the pin coercion test.
• Help wanted: same as last month.

• Key developments:
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/149130, coercion support of &pin T types, merged.
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/153693, borrow check of &pin place borrows, draft PR opened. The implementation needs to be refined and self-reviewed before the community reviews.
• Help wanted:
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144537. I failed to reproduce the CI errors locally. Hopefully, someone can help explain where (in which file) the links break

reference/print.html:42240: broken link fragment `#tymethod.drop` pointing to `core/ops/drop/trait.Drop.html`
reference/destructors.html:201: broken link fragment `#tymethod.drop` pointing to `core/ops/drop/trait.Drop.html`

(Just come back from the Spring Festival)

• In development:
  • (locally, no PR yet): design and implement the borrow checking algorithms of &pin
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144537, reviewed, to update the submodule book
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/149130, reviewed, to do some refactors according to the reviewed messages.

We just posted our March status update for BorrowSanitizer. TL;DR:

• We added hundreds more relevant tests from Miri's test suite. At the moment, 80% pass.
• We improved our cargo plugin (cargo-bsan) to better support multilanguage libraries. This will let us start to recreate the bugs from our earlier evaluation.

Our goal for April is to continue expanding our test suite, finish an initial version of the LLVM components of BorrowSanitizer, and hopefully start the RFC process on the LLVM side.

We just posted our February status update for BorrowSanitizer. TL;DR:

• We provide detailed error messages for aliasing violations, which look almost like Miri's do!

• We have two forms of retag intrinsic: __rust_retag_mem and __rust_retag_reg. We no longer require a compiler plugin to determine the permission associated with a retag, which will make it possible to use BorrowSanitizer by providing a single -Zsanitizer=borrow flag to rustc. You can check out our MCP for more detailed design updates.

• We are starting to have a better understanding of how BorrowSanitizer performs in practice, but we do not have enough data yet to be certain. From one test case, it seems like we are somewhat faster but still in the same category of performance as Miri when we compare against other sanitizers. Expect more detailed results to come as we scale up our benchmarking pipeline.

• We have a tentative plan for upstreaming BorrowSanitizer in 2026, starting with its LLVM components. We intend to start the RFC process on the LLVM side this spring, once our API is stable.

Key developments:

std::autodiff is now partly in CI, and std::offload got tested on a lot more benchmarks.

autodiff

Work continued on enabling autodiff in nightly. Since the last update, we have enabled autodiff in some Mingw and Linux runners. Users can now download libEnzyme artifacts, place them locally in the right spot for their toolchain, and then use autodiff on their nightly compiler. Once macOS is added, we will enable a new rustup component that will handle the download for users. Before enabling autodiff on macOS, however, we want to change how we distribute LLVM on this target (from static to dynamic linking). There are a lot of workflows and users of this target, not all of which can be modelled in the Rust CI. Our last two attempts sadly broke such downstream users and local contributors, so both attempts had to be reverted. Since testing here is tricky, progress here might be on the slower side; we will see.

offload

Most of the work on the offload side lately has been invisible, since we were working on implementing more benchmarks and LLVM optimizations, as well as missing features, discovered by those benchmarks. We achieved excellent performance on those benchmarks; more details will soon be presented by Marcelo Domínguez at the EuroLLVM conference in two weeks!

Beyond benchmarks, there was a lot of tinkering on smaller PRs, reviewing, and housekeeping. LLVM-22 landed, so we updated our bootrstrap code to make use of new APIs, and tried to move a few smaller PRs forward, mainly around a better user experience and for making more Rust features available. Since the focus is still on benchmarks, not many of those PRs landed. They are in a mostly ready state, so it's a good time to pick them up if you're considering contributing. Please ping me on Zulip or in any PR with the offload label if you are interested!

Update from the 2026-04-08 meeting:

-Zsanitize=kernel-hwaddress

rust#153049 is merged. What remains of the tracking issue rust#154171 is a few docs checklists.

Alice Ryhl added the unstable book doc changes in the PR itself and Wesley Wiser confirmed that's all the documentation needed for sanitizers.

Update from the 2026-03-11 meeting:

--emit=noreturn

It seems that figuring out which functions are noreturn is at a level too low for rustc. Function signatures are not sufficient and there are cases where rustc doesn't know whether to emit noreturn. It is something we should ask the LLVM to give us that information.

-Zsanitizer=kernel-hwaddress

Alice Ryhl opened a new issue to introduce the -Zsanitizer=kernel-hwaddress sanitizer for aarch64 targets: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/975

-Zharden-sls

Wesley Wiser is working on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/152821 which the -Zharden-sls patch should be rebased on top.

#![register_tool]

The corresponding RFC has been discussed by the Lang team on 2026-03-11. The overall vibe was positive and TC is going to read through it and hopefully check a box on the proposed FCP.

-Zdebuginfo-compression

The proposed stabilization received some feedback that needs to be addressed.

-Zdirect-access-external-data

The discussion here has stalled.

Updates from the 2026-01-28 and 2026-02-11 meetings:

-Zdirect-access-external-data rust#127488

Gary Guo's fix PR was merged: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/150494

--emit=noreturn

Miguel Ojeda reiterated that this is high on the list of compiler features the project needs. Right now, they're doing these checks manually: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/objtool/check.c#n186.

Improving objtool's handling of noreturn is on Gary Guo's radar but there wasn't time yet.

Key developments

PR open to get the first working version of the Reborrow and CoerceShared traits merged.

Blockers

Currently "blocked" on PR review, and of course my (and Ding's) work to fix all review issues.

The review has brought up an opportunity to replace Rvalue::Ref / ExprKind::Ref with a more generalised variant that could encompass both references and user-defined references. This would be powerful, but it would be a very big and scary change. If this turns out to be a blocking issue for reviewers, then this will block the goal for the foreseeable future as the PR then starts on a massive refactoring.

Help wanted

The PR currently does not include derive traits, but we'd really want them. Instead of these:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
impl<'a> Reborrow for CustomMarker<'a> {}
impl<'a> CoerceShared<CustomMarkerRef<'a>> for CustomMarker<a'> {}

impl<'a, T> Reborrow for CustomMut<'a, T> {}
impl<'a, T> CoerceShared<CustomRef<'a, T>> for CustomMut<'a, T> {}
}

we'd prefer to have something like this:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
#[derive(Reborrow, CoerceShared(CustomMarkerRef))]
struct CustomMarker<'a> { ... }

#[derive(Reborrow, CoerceShared(CustomRef))]
struct CustomMut<'a, T> { ... }
}

If anyone feels like picking up this thread, that'd be awesome: the derive macros do not need to really perform any validity checking, as the trait itself will do that.

If the PR merges soon, then public testing and exploration of the traits will be the next big thing. Likely concurrently with that the massive refactoring to generalise Rvalue::Ref / ExprKind::Ref.

Help wanted

• add more information to adts (e.g. doc comments, attributes, ...), whatever else is usually used by crates like bevy-reflect
• need to make struct field reflection respect privacy

No changes since last time.

I'm writing a document for the lang team meeting on reflection next week

• I added support for getting reflection information of any type, not just 'static ones
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/152381
• @9SonSteroids added a function pointer MVP and trait object support
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/152173
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/152003
• Asuna added basic struct/enum/union support
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151142

• @BD103 added slices, arrays and raw pointer support
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151019
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151031
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151118
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151119
• Asuna added all of our primitives
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151123
• Jamie Hill-Daniel gave us references
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151222
• @izagawd made it possible to extract some info from dyn Trait
  • https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/151239

There is ongoing work for Adts and function pointers, both of which will land as MVPs and will need some work to make them respect semver or generally become useful in practice

Removing the 'static bound from try_as_dyn turned out to have many warts, so I'm limiting it to a much smaller subset and will have borrowck emit the 'static requirement if the other rules do not apply (instead of having an unconditional 'static requirement)

For the scalable vector half of the goal, we've landed a bunch of compiler fixes - rust-lang/rust#153286, rust-lang/rust#153608, rust-lang/rust#154850, rust-lang/rust#154950, rust-lang/rust#155106 and rust-lang/rust#155243 - and opened our stdarch patch with intrinsics - rust-lang/stdarch#2071. That patch should be passing CI tomorrow once nightly updates to fix an unrelated spurious CI failure. We've got a handful of follow-ups to do afterwards, listed on rust-lang/rust#145052.

For the sized hierarchy half of the goal, Rémy Rakic and I had two design meetings with the language team (2026/03/18 and 2026/03/25) discussing the syntax/naming and migration strategy respectively.

On syntax, the language team preferred introducing an "only bounds" syntax to control opting-out of default bounds and opting-in to alternative bounds in a family of traits (described in an alternative in the RFC), but there was an open question of whether that syntax should apply to an individual bound or all of the bounds - Niko Matsakis is investigating that.

On naming, the language team also preferred the name SizeOfVal over MetaSized, and didn't like Pointee but had no better alternatives. Rémy Rakic prepared rust-lang/rust#154374 to do that renaming and started a discussion with the library team to confirm they were happy with the name, because changing it involves an amount of churn. The library team wanted to know what other traits in the hierarchy might later be introduced, as that would help inform the naming of the currently proposed traits, so Rémy Rakic wrote up a document with that information. We're holding off on doing any name changes until we find some consensus between libs and lang - who is responsible for these traits' names is a bit unclear.

On migration, the language team were largely happy with our proposed approach, and we realised that the approach proposed by lcnr for associated types might also work for our other migrations. Rémy Rakic has had meetings with lcnr to better understand that approach and to work out the next steps for implementing it.

Per last comment, rust-lang/rfcs#3729 has been updated

On the scalable vector half of the goal, I've got a branch with rust-lang/stdarch#1509 rebased, though without the intrinsic-test tool having been updated - that ended up being tricky and we've agreed to do it as a follow-up. We've opened rust-lang/rust#153286 with the compiler fixes that the stdarch patch requires, which should land soon (rust-lang/rust#153653 was opened and landed in the interim).

On the sized hierarchy half of the goal, Rémy Rakic has been updating our RFC such that we can discuss it in design meetings with the language team on the 18th and 25th - we'll update rust-lang/rfcs#3729 later today. We've split out the const Sized parts as a future possibility (though one we are committed to pursuing) as that has more open design questions, and we've discussed the proposed syntax and approach to migration - which are what we intend to focus on in the design meetings. He's also been working out how we can start implementing our migration strategy and help resolve blockers in other areas.

Progress has been slow since the last update because I've been busy, but I've been working on a rebase of rust-lang/stdarch#1509, which has bitrot quite a bit. Rémy Rakic is joining me to work on the Sized Hierarchy parts of the goal.

Key developments: Opened PR (#16767(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/16767)) extending Clippy support to unsafe fields. Blockers: Waiting for t-clippy to review #16767(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/16767).

RFC has been accepted. I'm preparing a 2026 continuing goal for stabilization.