3 ms·

>> Compare this to Rust compiler: you start with nothing but C(++? I don't remember) compiler, and end with Rust compiler. No intermediate download involved. >

by dozzie 11y ago

>> Compare this to Rust compiler: you start with nothing but C(++? I don't remember) compiler, and end with Rust compiler. No intermediate download involved. > This is incorrect. Rust has been self-hosting for years. Incorrect in that Rust actually downloads something, as steveklabnik pointed. I admit that I expected more from Rust, and I feel disappointed the same with the compiler as with Cargo. But your premise that self-hosted language automatically means that bootstrapping can't be done using C or C++ is false. Compare that with OCaml and GHC. > The fact that you didn't even know that Rust is self-hosted is proof that it really doesn't matter to the user—it was so invisible you didn't notice it! It could be tried to read as that, if it was a fact. I did expect Rust to be self-hosted, just it is a custom that bootstrapping compiler is written in something else. Look at how OCaml or GHC (Haskell) are built. Both allow to use C compiler to compile them (even though they generally advise to use pre-compiled compilers).

pcwalton 11y ago
> Both allow to use C compiler to compile them (even though they generally advise to use pre-compiled compilers). How many people actually do this, though? We had this conversation early on in Rust's life and the consensus was that we could make a non-bootstrapping compiler in theory, but that'd be asking us to do a huge amount of work (writing a separate compiler!) for something that very few people are going to use in practice. There are so many more important things that we could be (and are) working on than something that's basically just for purism, because most people just "apt-get install rust" or "brew install rust" and don't care how it's built.
- dozzie 11y ago
  > How many people actually do this, though? Enough to warrant this being kept after eight years after I've seen it for the first time. > We had this conversation early on in Rust's life and the consensus was that we could make a non-bootstrapping compiler in theory, but that'd be asking us to do a huge amount of work (writing a separate compiler!) for something that very few people are going to use in practice. Note that it's not necessary to have fully blown compiler. Just a subset of language would be just enough, if it allowed for compiling the compiler. And how many of the Rust features are embedded in rustc, anyway? > There are so many more important things that we could be (and are) working on than something that's basically just for purism, because most people just "apt-get install rust" or "brew install rust" and don't care how it's built. So you basicaly say "fuck you" to distribution developers and all the sysadmins that care about their systems, am I right?
  - burntsushi 11y ago
    > So you basicaly say "fuck you" to distribution developers and all the sysadmins that care about their systems, am I right? Your aggression, insulting tone and condescension (throughout your comments in this thread) is not appreciated. Please stop.
  - pcwalton 11y ago
    > And how many of the Rust features are embedded in rustc, anyway? All of them. This is not an exaggeration.
  - wtetzner 11y ago
    Where are you getting your C compiler from?

by dozzie 11y ago

pcwalton 11y ago

> Both allow to use C compiler to compile them (even though they generally advise to use pre-compiled compilers). How many people actually do this, though? We had this conversation early on in Rust's life and the consensus was that we could make a non-bootstrapping compiler in theory, but that'd be asking us to do a huge amount of work (writing a separate compiler!) for something that very few people are going to use in practice. There are so many more important things that we could be (and are) working on than something that's basically just for purism, because most people just "apt-get install rust" or "brew install rust" and don't care how it's built.

dozzie 11y ago
> How many people actually do this, though? Enough to warrant this being kept after eight years after I've seen it for the first time. > We had this conversation early on in Rust's life and the consensus was that we could make a non-bootstrapping compiler in theory, but that'd be asking us to do a huge amount of work (writing a separate compiler!) for something that very few people are going to use in practice. Note that it's not necessary to have fully blown compiler. Just a subset of language would be just enough, if it allowed for compiling the compiler. And how many of the Rust features are embedded in rustc, anyway? > There are so many more important things that we could be (and are) working on than something that's basically just for purism, because most people just "apt-get install rust" or "brew install rust" and don't care how it's built. So you basicaly say "fuck you" to distribution developers and all the sysadmins that care about their systems, am I right?
- burntsushi 11y ago
  > So you basicaly say "fuck you" to distribution developers and all the sysadmins that care about their systems, am I right? Your aggression, insulting tone and condescension (throughout your comments in this thread) is not appreciated. Please stop.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > And how many of the Rust features are embedded in rustc, anyway? All of them. This is not an exaggeration.
- wtetzner 11y ago
  Where are you getting your C compiler from?