3 ms·

How’s this compare to https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode

by m0meni 8y ago

sitkack 8y ago
He doesn't appear to be a direct contributor, probably more of an inspiration. The only overlap I know of is that he also works/worked at Galois. c2rust is written mostly in Rust, Python and C where as corrode was written in Haskell. The output of c2rust looks more like a literal projection from C into Rust, Corrode tried to limit the use of unsafe. $ tokei ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Language Files Lines Code Comments Blanks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Autoconf 4 199 85 56 58 C 88 6989 5175 754 1060 C Header 21 2949 1497 1073 379 CMake 5 84 60 10 14 C++ 5 3015 2320 295 400 C++ Header 1 132 101 7 24 Dockerfile 1 62 50 6 6 HTML 2 84 78 0 6 Makefile 3 88 63 3 22 Markdown 23 1482 1482 0 0 Python 26 6597 4988 319 1290 Rust 250 45111 35949 2893 6269 Shell 44 697 429 141 127 Plain Text 15 555 555 0 0 TOML 11 197 148 24 25 Vim Script 1 233 195 4 34 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 500 68474 53175 5585 9714 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- masklinn 8y ago
  > The output of c2rust looks more like a literal projection from C into Rust, Corrode tried to limit the use of unsafe. I don't think either statement is true. Both projects bill themselves as semantics-preserving translators, as in they try to generate Rust code which compiles and works the same way the original C code did (in fact corrode has a cc script which first compiles C to Rust then Rust to native). Citrus is the literal projection: it's not semantics-preserving and usually doesn't generate compilable code.
glguy 8y ago
(I'm one of the authors of this tool) Our original plan was to simply work to improve Corrode. We eventually decided to to implement a new tool that uses Clang as the frontend in order to get more reliable parsing, preprocessing, and type checking of the input C code. The result is that we are able to support more code and C extensions than we thought we'd be able to building on top of the good work of the Corrode project.
- phkahler 8y ago
  Is there any hope of going after even a subset of C++? I know the difference is enormous, I'm just asking the question.
  - glguy 8y ago
    We've only started pondering what subset of C++ we might be able to support in future work for the project. Currently only C is in scope. That's an obvious next goal but it seems quite a bit more daunting!
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

How’s this compare to https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode

by m0meni 8y ago

How’s this compare to https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode https://github.com/jameysharp/corrode

He doesn't appear to be a direct contributor, probably more of an inspiration. The only overlap I know of is that he also works/worked at Galois. c2rust is written mostly in Rust, Python and C where as corrode was written in Haskell. The output of c2rust looks more like a literal projection from C into Rust, Corrode tried to limit the use of unsafe. $ tokei ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Language Files Lines Code Comments Blanks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Autoconf 4 199 85 56 58 C 88 6989 5175 754 1060 C Header 21 2949 1497 1073 379 CMake 5 84 60 10 14 C++ 5 3015 2320 295 400 C++ Header 1 132 101 7 24 Dockerfile 1 62 50 6 6 HTML 2 84 78 0 6 Makefile 3 88 63 3 22 Markdown 23 1482 1482 0 0 Python 26 6597 4988 319 1290 Rust 250 45111 35949 2893 6269 Shell 44 697 429 141 127 Plain Text 15 555 555 0 0 TOML 11 197 148 24 25 Vim Script 1 233 195 4 34 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 500 68474 53175 5585 9714 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

masklinn 8y ago
> The output of c2rust looks more like a literal projection from C into Rust, Corrode tried to limit the use of unsafe. I don't think either statement is true. Both projects bill themselves as semantics-preserving translators, as in they try to generate Rust code which compiles and works the same way the original C code did (in fact corrode has a cc script which first compiles C to Rust then Rust to native). Citrus is the literal projection: it's not semantics-preserving and usually doesn't generate compilable code.

glguy 8y ago

(I'm one of the authors of this tool) Our original plan was to simply work to improve Corrode. We eventually decided to to implement a new tool that uses Clang as the frontend in order to get more reliable parsing, preprocessing, and type checking of the input C code. The result is that we are able to support more code and C extensions than we thought we'd be able to building on top of the good work of the Corrode project.

phkahler 8y ago
Is there any hope of going after even a subset of C++? I know the difference is enormous, I'm just asking the question.
- glguy 8y ago
  We've only started pondering what subset of C++ we might be able to support in future work for the project. Currently only C is in scope. That's an obvious next goal but it seems quite a bit more daunting!

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]