4 ms·

> then points out that rustc can't compile itself on i386, which is relevant… how? I'm actually gobsmacked this is the case. There used to be a saying, only ha

> then points out that rustc can't compile itself on i386, which is relevant… how? I'm actually gobsmacked this is the case. There used to be a saying, only half-joking, that a language that can't host/compile/bootstrap itself is nothing more than a toy. As others have more eloquently pointed out, it shouldn't have to be explained why people who write operating systems and compilers would consider that a no-go.

masklinn 9y ago
> I'm actually gobsmacked this is the case. So gobsmacked you apparently couldn't even begin to attempt answering the question but felt you just had to go on a rant as irrelevant as you believe it's righteous, uh? > There used to be a saying, only half-joking, that a language that can't host/compile/bootstrap itself is nothing more than a toy. As others have more eloquently pointed out, it shouldn't have to be explained why people who write operating systems and compilers would consider that a no-go. Rust has been self-hosted for almost as long as it's existed. The boostrapping OCaml compiler was left behind back in 2011.
- 2trill2spill 9y ago
  > Rust has been self-hosted for almost as long as it's existed. The boostrapping OCaml compiler was left behind back in 2011. Not on x86 which is what this whole conversation is talking about. So if OpenBSD used rust in base they would have to drop support for x86.
  - sverige 9y ago
    We haven't even gotten to alpha, hppa, loongson, luna88k, macppc, octeon, sgi, or that backwards beauty of big-endianness, sparc64. But hey, it compiles on amd64! That should be good enough, right?
ansible 9y ago
Eh, 64-bit desktops were becoming common a decade ago. Considering the small minority of developers using a 32-bit machine for development, I don't see that it is worthwhile to spend effort on that. Note that Rust can (and does) target various 32-bit platforms (ARM and maybe RISC-V, not sure) for cross-compile. Self-hosting on a 32-bit platform is such a minor drawback these days. 64-bit ARM processors are becoming more common these days as well.
- zaarn 9y ago
  There are still plenty of 32bit machines out there. I personally have maintained and support a Intel 4004 knockoff used for controlling a big industrial machine. And of course more modern variants of the same machine with an 8008. Some of these couldn't even run DOS but it's still supported. 32bit is not even close to be being that old and lots of machines, applications or platforms require it and they need maintenance. Especially OpenBSD is a system that I as a Linux-fan recognize for supporting old hardware much better than Linux. And it's not only 32bit x86, there is plenty of other architectures limited to 32bit, mostly from the ARM sector but I believe some older MIPS and other even more exotic arch's are supported. If rust can't selfhost on x86 how can we expect it to selfhost on more exotic 32bit hardware that BSD supports?
  - ansible 9y ago
    Oh, I wasn't implying that OBSD or NBSD should adopt Rust as a development language. Not at all. My point is more that I wouldn't want the Rust developers to spend time on making it able to self-host on 32-bit platforms. I'd prefer they spend their time elsewhere, that's all.
    - npsimons 9y ago
      > I'd prefer they spend their time elsewhere, that's all. And I'm sure the OpenBSD developers would prefer to spend their time on OpenBSD instead of working around Rust's lack of support for a platform that OpenBSD supports. I'm still kind of surprised that when the question of "why doesn't OpenBSD switch to Rust?" and the answer was "because Rust doesn't self host on a platform we support" that the response has been "well drop that platform." How about: no. How about: if someone wants Rust to be a viable option, then they have to adjust Rust to be a viable option, not ask other projects to massively constrain their currently working support of a platform. I hate to sound like the old geezer, but I get the impression that many people here have no clue about software beyond desktop and mobile. It's like they don't even realize that firmware and operating systems have to be written and maintained on older hardware. There is a lot of software out there running on legacy hardware that the world depends upon which you never see.

masklinn 9y ago

> I'm actually gobsmacked this is the case. So gobsmacked you apparently couldn't even begin to attempt answering the question but felt you just had to go on a rant as irrelevant as you believe it's righteous, uh? > There used to be a saying, only half-joking, that a language that can't host/compile/bootstrap itself is nothing more than a toy. As others have more eloquently pointed out, it shouldn't have to be explained why people who write operating systems and compilers would consider that a no-go. Rust has been self-hosted for almost as long as it's existed. The boostrapping OCaml compiler was left behind back in 2011.

2trill2spill 9y ago
> Rust has been self-hosted for almost as long as it's existed. The boostrapping OCaml compiler was left behind back in 2011. Not on x86 which is what this whole conversation is talking about. So if OpenBSD used rust in base they would have to drop support for x86.
- sverige 9y ago
  We haven't even gotten to alpha, hppa, loongson, luna88k, macppc, octeon, sgi, or that backwards beauty of big-endianness, sparc64. But hey, it compiles on amd64! That should be good enough, right?

ansible 9y ago

Eh, 64-bit desktops were becoming common a decade ago. Considering the small minority of developers using a 32-bit machine for development, I don't see that it is worthwhile to spend effort on that. Note that Rust can (and does) target various 32-bit platforms (ARM and maybe RISC-V, not sure) for cross-compile. Self-hosting on a 32-bit platform is such a minor drawback these days. 64-bit ARM processors are becoming more common these days as well.

zaarn 9y ago
There are still plenty of 32bit machines out there. I personally have maintained and support a Intel 4004 knockoff used for controlling a big industrial machine. And of course more modern variants of the same machine with an 8008. Some of these couldn't even run DOS but it's still supported. 32bit is not even close to be being that old and lots of machines, applications or platforms require it and they need maintenance. Especially OpenBSD is a system that I as a Linux-fan recognize for supporting old hardware much better than Linux. And it's not only 32bit x86, there is plenty of other architectures limited to 32bit, mostly from the ARM sector but I believe some older MIPS and other even more exotic arch's are supported. If rust can't selfhost on x86 how can we expect it to selfhost on more exotic 32bit hardware that BSD supports?
- ansible 9y ago
  Oh, I wasn't implying that OBSD or NBSD should adopt Rust as a development language. Not at all. My point is more that I wouldn't want the Rust developers to spend time on making it able to self-host on 32-bit platforms. I'd prefer they spend their time elsewhere, that's all.
  - npsimons 9y ago
    > I'd prefer they spend their time elsewhere, that's all. And I'm sure the OpenBSD developers would prefer to spend their time on OpenBSD instead of working around Rust's lack of support for a platform that OpenBSD supports. I'm still kind of surprised that when the question of "why doesn't OpenBSD switch to Rust?" and the answer was "because Rust doesn't self host on a platform we support" that the response has been "well drop that platform." How about: no. How about: if someone wants Rust to be a viable option, then they have to adjust Rust to be a viable option, not ask other projects to massively constrain their currently working support of a platform. I hate to sound like the old geezer, but I get the impression that many people here have no clue about software beyond desktop and mobile. It's like they don't even realize that firmware and operating systems have to be written and maintained on older hardware. There is a lot of software out there running on legacy hardware that the world depends upon which you never see.