On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 16, 2017, at 10:43, Gregory Szorc <gregory.sz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Last time we had the Rust discussion, we couldn't ship Rust due to distro > packaging support. Has that changed? > > > My gut feeling with my maintainer hat on is that any rust speedups would > need to be opt-in, much like today's C speedups. My understanding of Rust > is that it'll have significantly fewer ABI woes for our needs than C++ > might. > I also agree I'd rather start using Rust before C++. It's worth noting that while our C speedups are strictly speaking optional, setup.py tries to build them by default and fails if it can't. Furthermore, our default module import policy requires the C extensions by default. This isn't a huge problem today because many systems can build Python C extensions (or at least can easily after installing a python-dev or python-devel package). But Rust support in distros isn't quite there. So I fear requiring Rust today will make it more difficult to get the speedups than the corresponding C versions. > > FWIW, Firefox appears to be driving a lot of distro support for Rust. > Firefox 54+ now require Rust to build. Furthermore, Firefox is pretty > aggressive about adopting new versions of Rust. What this means is that the > next Firefox ESR (after 52, which was released last week) will effectively > require distros to support whatever version of Rust that ESR is using. I'm > not exactly where distros are w.r.t. Rust support today. But the major ones > all know they need to get their Rust story in order for the next Firefox > ESR, which I think is sometime in 2018. Ask me over beers what those > conversations were like :) > >
_______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
