4 ms·
Like C++, they basically seem to take the stance of "no".
by martinhath 6y ago
Like C++, they basically seem to take the stance of "no".
- steveklabnik 6y agoThere's some subtleties there, on both the C++ and Rust side. I won't speak to the C++ stuff, but on the Rust side, it's more "not yet, and we don't know when, and maybe never, we'll see" than it is "no."
- bluejekyll 6y agoIt would be accurate to say that the only stable ABI Rust currently supports is the C FFI ABI, right?
- steveklabnik 6y agoI would say that "the Rust ABI is not stable, but Rust also supports other ABIs." https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/external-blocks.html#abi https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/items/external-bl...
- saagarjha 6y agoDo you think that there will ever be reified generics on the ABI boundary?
- steveklabnik 6y agoNo idea, ABIs aren't my area of expertise.
- qppo 6y agoA large amount of cruft and performance issues in the C++ standard library remain because the committee is too afraid of breaking ABI compatibility, so it's not so much as a "no" as "oh no." Even MSVC hasn't broken ABI in a bit.