3 ms·

1. seems like a chicken and egg problem. I'm sure that the Debian developers wouldn't mind shipping it if it made sense (see 2). 2. is a fair point. At this po

1. seems like a chicken and egg problem. I'm sure that the Debian developers wouldn't mind shipping it if it made sense (see 2). 2. is a fair point. At this point in Rust's life I see how avoiding binary conpatibility questions makes sense. Is anybody even working on it, though? Otherwise Rust could be making system-provided, dynamically linked libraries almost impossible due to earlier design decisions without consideration for BC.

est31 6y ago
> Is anybody even working on it, though? There is no work on MVPs or RFCs for now, but stable ABIs are being discussed currently: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/a-stable-modular-abi-for-rust/12347 https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/a-stable-modular-abi-for-r...
zozbot234 6y ago
> Otherwise Rust could be making system-provided, dynamically linked libraries almost impossible They're very much possible; they're just limited to using the C ABI when interacting with dynamically-linked code. More complex features can be implemented by providing thin wrappers as part of language-specific bindings.