4 ms·

Is it not reasonable to throw this back at the CPU makers? If you want to bring out a new cpu architecture, port all the compilers to it before you start sellin

Is it not reasonable to throw this back at the CPU makers? If you want to bring out a new cpu architecture, port all the compilers to it before you start selling it.

msla 6y ago
The problem is that chipmakers have historically made their development environments closed-source and, often, not very pleasant to work with. Maybe this is more of a problem with demonstration boards meant primarily for embedded systems people, but if you rely on TI, for example, to provide a compiler, they'll give you a closed-source IDE for their own C compiler which may or may not be especially standards-compliant. I hesitate to imagine what it would take to get a hardware maker to contribute patches to LLVM.
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago
  And we have seen, that is to the detriment to the chip maker. It’s said that ATMEL chips became way more popular than PIC because of AVR Dude and cheap knock off programmer boards on eBay. A modern day architecture would be competing with these already established open source tool chains so they would either remain obscure like FPGAs are now, open source their stuff, or be on the scale of Apple or Microsoft where they are able to outcompete them open source stuff (for what purpose though)
tedunangst 6y ago
If new CPU makers are expected to update all existing compilers, wouldn't the counterpoint be that new compiler writers are expected to support all existing CPUs?
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago
  IMO it depends who stands to gain from it. If you make a new compiler, you need to make sure x86 and ARM work because that’s what most of your users will be using. There is almost no gain in adding support to some ancient cpu that no one uses anymore. On the other side, if you make a new cpu architecture, all of your users (people buying the chip) will gain from porting compilers. No one is expected to do anything (unless they are being paid). It’s just logical for people to work this way.
- wmf 6y ago
  Sure, but that wouldn't have helped in this case since 68K, Alpha, PA-RISC, and S/390 were not "existing" CPUs at the time Rust was invented.

Is it not reasonable to throw this back at the CPU makers? If you want to bring out a new cpu architecture, port all the compilers to it before you start selling it.

msla 6y ago

The problem is that chipmakers have historically made their development environments closed-source and, often, not very pleasant to work with. Maybe this is more of a problem with demonstration boards meant primarily for embedded systems people, but if you rely on TI, for example, to provide a compiler, they'll give you a closed-source IDE for their own C compiler which may or may not be especially standards-compliant. I hesitate to imagine what it would take to get a hardware maker to contribute patches to LLVM.

PurpleFoxy 6y ago
And we have seen, that is to the detriment to the chip maker. It’s said that ATMEL chips became way more popular than PIC because of AVR Dude and cheap knock off programmer boards on eBay. A modern day architecture would be competing with these already established open source tool chains so they would either remain obscure like FPGAs are now, open source their stuff, or be on the scale of Apple or Microsoft where they are able to outcompete them open source stuff (for what purpose though)

tedunangst 6y ago

If new CPU makers are expected to update all existing compilers, wouldn't the counterpoint be that new compiler writers are expected to support all existing CPUs?

PurpleFoxy 6y ago
IMO it depends who stands to gain from it. If you make a new compiler, you need to make sure x86 and ARM work because that’s what most of your users will be using. There is almost no gain in adding support to some ancient cpu that no one uses anymore. On the other side, if you make a new cpu architecture, all of your users (people buying the chip) will gain from porting compilers. No one is expected to do anything (unless they are being paid). It’s just logical for people to work this way.
wmf 6y ago
Sure, but that wouldn't have helped in this case since 68K, Alpha, PA-RISC, and S/390 were not "existing" CPUs at the time Rust was invented.