On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Brian Anderson <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 10/01/2013 07:41 AM, Jason E. Aten wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:43 AM, Dan Cristian Octavian < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> One of my first thoughts when I saw the Rust project was to make it >> runtimeless. Shortly after that was achieved rather trivially with >> zero.rs. I don't know if any major improvement can be done there. >> > > I'm relatively new to Rust, but making Rust runtimeless is not-yet done > if I understand the situation; and still seems a worth[while] goal. > > > This is true, and I believe 'runtimeless' is a misnomer. Rust needs some > amount of support at runtime in order to support some features that are key > to the language - allocation, unwinding, logging, task-local data in > particular, but also key methods on strings and vectors, etc. that you > really wouldn't want to live without. The current efforts around zero.rslet > you run without a runtime, but not utilize the full language. The real > goal here is to factor libstd into subsystems that can be implemented or > excluded from the build independently to support different environments. > Just understanding the requirements here is a major effort, and I imagine > that designing std in such a way that it can run properly on various > embedded systems, while not being very difficult to maintain will take a > long time and much iteration. > Seems about the right size/scope of a project for a masters. Not-trivial. But doable with 6-9 months of part-time work, no?
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
