David Starner <[email protected]> writes: > The developer has decided to do a rewrite in Rust instead of some > other memory safe language. There are certain advantages to going with > the language more people know and use. Part of it is that systems that > don't support Rust are going to be less and less capable of using > modern software. (For a counter example, look at CVSup, written in
This sounds awful. Especially since it is a software issue: the hardware is capable of running Rust, it’s just LLVM that doesn’t support it. Riccardo Mottola <[email protected]> writes: > Perhaps if rust on GCC gives "enough rust" do compile the needed > tools, it might be enough to support also architectures whic gcc > supports, that is for now 68k, PPC, Alpa, HP-PA... > [1] https://rust-gcc.github.io/ I asked in #gccrust IRC on oftc.net GCCrs about the state and sam pointed me to a recent timeline update: > We still think we'll be able to compile libcore before the end of the > summer … > We expect to be able to compile some 1.49 code correctly next year … > The next targeted version will probably be rust 1.78 as we want to > keep up with rust for linux. This shouldn't be too long > -- > https://lore.kernel.org/git/[email protected]/ So maybe not kill support for old hardware when a solution may be available next summer. At that point it would be viable to ask people to test their projects against GCCrs, too. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
