3 ms·
> A) I don't think this is needed you could just pin a older rust version. But if it's needed we are not quite there yet. The problem I think is that SQLite is
by zinekeller 5y ago
> A) I don't think this is needed you could just pin a older rust version. But if it's needed we are not quite there yet.
The problem I think is that SQLite is also used in embedded systems, they need to be predictable (for example, for all of its flaws C89 is still used in SQLite). So unless that there is a subset that is that stable, they won't move yet.
- dathinab 5y ago> So unless that there is a subset that is that stable, This is kinda a point of rust that every compiler can compile code of all previous versions up to rustc 1.0.0.(Sure it isn't perfect, there was some fallout especially during the earlier rust days.) So you could require language/library compatibility with e.g. 1.55 while any compiler >=1.55 _should_ be usable/compatible for building it. (You still would need the 1.55 compiler for development to make sure you stay compatible.) Now I guess there are still problems with that I guess and what they would like is probably some form of rust LTS version. Theoretically there is little problem with bumping the minimal rust version every year or so (due to the compatibility guarantees) BUT on embedded you might not have "proper" upstream LLVM support which would mean that when rust bumps LLVM you might lose rust support, I guess.
- zinekeller 5y agoI'm referring, of course, to those embedded versions. I've dabbled into Rust and Go, and they are certainly nicer than C in non-trivial programming, but knowing how slow everyone in industrial systems adopt something, I'm not holding my breath. Maybe a SQLite for "normal" applications (the real-world definition, not apps)?