3 ms·

I don't believe Apple has embraced Rust the same way Google has. Particularly their firmware is still very based on C.

• dagmx 3y ago
  Specifically a dialect called Firebloom (supposedly anyway) https://saaramar.github.io/iBoot_firebloom/ https://saaramar.github.io/iBoot_firebloom/
  • mrpippy 3y ago
    Possible related to the ‘-fbounds-safety’ feature they’ve proposed for Clang https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-enforcing-bounds-safety-in-c-fbounds-safety/70854 https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-enforcing-bounds-safety-in-...
    • jonpalmisc 3y ago
      Firebloom == `-fbounds-safety`
  • jonpalmisc 3y ago
    Firebloom is more of a custom compiler/toolchain than a dialect of C—apart from annotations to relate pointer+length parameters, etc., it is still just C.
    • jd3 3y ago
      Reminds me of this blurb from djb's qmail security guarantee [0]: > I've mostly given up on the standard C library. Many of its facilities, particularly stdio, seem designed to encourage bugs. A big chunk of qmail is stolen from a basic C library that I've been developing for several years for a variety of applications. The stralloc concept and getln() make it very easy to avoid buffer overruns, memory leaks, and artificial line length limits. [0]: http://cr.yp.to/qmail/guarantee.html http://cr.yp.to/qmail/guarantee.html
    • sigsev_251 3y ago
      I mean, the annotations are supposed to be simple C attributes wrapped in macros, so even them are just C
• jonpalmisc 3y ago
  The other commenter mentioning Firebloom is correct that some firmware (iBoot family) has been using C w/ Firebloom extensions for a while. Parts of SEPOS also use Swift, which would make more sense as a non-C language than Rust, from Apple's perspective at least.