Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

There Are Renewed Discussions About Having Rust Language Support Within GCC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by SpyroRyder View Post
    I feel like this is going to be a bad move unless the rust devs give us a spec rather than the living language aproach
    Tbh while I agree that is definitely a problem, I would prefer Rust to remain a living language for maybe another 5 years or so. The reason is fairly simple: the language is still churning too much, which is evidenced by the fact that there are a fair few big crates like Rocket that require Nightly Rust, and there are still big features on the horizon like the Never type. There's also a fair few areas where Rust needs some major work still, like its unit testing story. Which in it's current state is extremely primitive unless you're using the Galvanize crate which hasn't seen an update in 2 years.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Candy View Post
      It will end the same death as gcj did. Rust is a language that no one uses.
      I beg to differ. I work at a company with hundreds of developers, where it has been adopted as the primary language. The community also seems vibrant. It's still relatively small at the moment but it's growing fast.

      I know John Paul has been working on bringing Rust to m68k. Maybe he'll achieve that quicker via this route.
      Last edited by Chewi; 29 December 2019, 12:13 PM.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by SpyroRyder View Post

        spec and standard are different things though. It wouldnt take much for the Rust devs to say "this is the spec for Rust 2020, we shall also abide by it and all api/functional changes will now be a part of the 2021 branch" or something similar. They wont though cause the modern way of doing things is to have one dev team manage the full stack thus allowing everythong to respond to change quicker. Same reason you have to use Cargo and cant effectively build proper support into Meson and CMake

        They already do though, see Rust 2015 & Rust 2018.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Candy View Post
          It will end the same death as gcj did. Rust is a language that no one uses.
          Are you joking? It's one of the fastest rising languages in the world. Discord and Microsoft have adopted it off the top of my head. I don't even use Rust and I think it's ownership model is idiotic, but you're just being delusional.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Candy View Post
            It will end the same death as gcj did. Rust is a language that no one uses.
            Yeah! Rust will end up in oblivion the same way Java did, oh wait...

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Candy View Post
              It will end the same death as gcj did.
              If the core community of developers is not large or diverse enough, it can die. That is the importance of building a developer community before accepting it into GCC.
              Rust is a language that no one uses.
              It is certainly not a language that everyone use, but to say no one does dismisses the large number of individuals, projects, and corporations, that do. Perhaps you meant to say *you* do not use it.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Almindor View Post

                Rust has stabilized Async/Await recently, not sure if you mean something else with "pinned down" here tho.

                I'd say Rust is "there" now, I don't think there are many core language features missing apart maybe for const generics which once done will fix a LOT of inconsistencies and headaches and make the core nice and coherent.
                Yes, that's what I meant with pinned down (I don't know if I missed the news piece or I read it and forgot about it). As for other features, I too feel Rust is pretty solid at this point. But since I'm not up to date with what's going on with modern languages or compilers, there may be features I'm missing.
                Either way, I think it's up to the language developers/maintainers to say when they still have significant changes to make and when the whole thing is solid enough to become spec/standard worthy.

                Comment


                • #18
                  I think everyone would like some form of LTS release for the Rust ecosystem, but the language is still rapidly evolving and there isn't enough money to make this happen. The best idea I've heard of for creating a more stable target for Rust is versioning MIR. Then Rust developers can keep adding new features as long as they can be boiled off by the time the code is compiled down to MIR. This would minimize the investment needed for new compiler backends and high-assurance tooling.

                  But, again, some vendor would need to step-up and pay for that work.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X