On 10/01/2013 12:13 PM, Jason E. Aten wrote:
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Brian Anderson <[email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 <http://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.rs <http://zero.rs> let 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?
Possibly, yes.
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
