3 ms·

I didn't think they made any language extensions for rust? Thought it was just for Ada.

thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
Ada does not have any formalized FFI with Rust at this time; just C, COBOL, and Fortran: http://ada-auth.org/standards/22rm/html/RM-B.html http://ada-auth.org/standards/22rm/html/RM-B.html AdaCore has a Rust toolchain: https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust
- sheepshear 3y ago
  I know, thank you, but I'm asking about the "curated" language features gp is criticizing. AdaCore does make Ada language extensions (who else would push the language forward these days?), but I didn't think they had any for rust, which is why I'm asking.
  - galangalalgol 3y ago
    > GNAT Pro for Rust offers yearly updates that incorporate selected, recent enhancements from the upstream development. We make sure the result is a stable, tested Rust toolchain that’s ready to be used and supported for years to come. https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust Edit: not so worried about the extensions, more worried they will keep re-releasing 1.68 forever with features added only as people clamor for them. And security fixes wedged into old code. That is in effect forking the language.
    - sheepshear 3y ago
      The direct competition between Ferrocene and AdaCore should take care of that. In any case, the compiler wouldn't be certified if they didn't vet the new features. These companies can't control what gets added to the language, and it might take longer than a year to vet future changes. Their statement is an upfront, no-bull fyi about how reality works. I highly doubt it's a statement of intent to stagnate. It would kind of defeat the purpose of switching away from a stagnated language and ecosystem.
      - galangalalgol 3y ago
        I can imagine no use case where ripping out features from upstream reduces risk vs adding it. I agree it makes no sense to stagnate, but I am familiar with the certified compiler space, and what I have described is exactly what I have witnessed. Compilers that are based on ancient versions of open source compilers, and have code incorporated from various point releases since then to minimize the amount of recertification necessary.
        sheepshear 3y ago
        What happens when a new feature holds up the certification process for some reason? There are only two possible options, and they both suck: 1. Stay on the last certified version until everything is certified. 2. Incorporate the parts that can be certified.
        galangalalgol 3y ago
        The ferrous option appears to be 3. upstream changes that make certification of the new feature easier and then proceed.
        sheepshear 3y ago
        If that's still an option, then they haven't reached the point yet where they have to choose. They're promising yearly updates. I'm asking what happens when a new upstream feature has already gone uncertified for one full year. Either they blow past the deadline and release nothing for over a year, or they ship what's currently available. There's no third option. Ferrous doesn't have a time machine, and AdaCore is just explicitly saying that they'll give you what they have at least once a year.
    - thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
      >> That is in effect forking the language. It feels like the effectiveness and success of Rust could make that happen. Different industries have different needs and will want the language to meet their needs. Rust needs more funding, labor, and organization to create an official language standard to prevent it from fragmenting.
      - galangalalgol 3y ago
        Ferrous created a language specification. https://github.com/ferrocene/specification https://github.com/ferrocene/specification They do say any differences between it and upstream behavior or documentation is a defect in the spec, not upstream. So it isn't authoritative. Unless we all decide it is.
        thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
        They have explicitly stated that a Rust language specification is a non-goal for Ferrocene: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thesuperbigfrog&next=37769361# https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thesuperbigfrog&next...
        Argorak 3y ago
        There's an ongoing discussion about potential adoption into upstream, though. The thing here is: it would be harmful if we, Ferrous Systems, claimed or even be confused with a more general Rust spec. That's a) the privilege of the Rust project and b) problematic if consumers were to understand it that way.
        zozbot234 3y ago
        Doesn't Rust have a Reference manual already? A "spec" just wouldn't be very meaningful given the lack of independent implementations. But to the extent that the reference manual doesn't suffice for documenting the language, that's a defect which could and should be fixed.
  - thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
    >> AdaCore does make Ada language extensions (who else would push the language forward these days?), but I didn't think they had any for rust, which is why I'm asking. Correct, AdaCore / GNAT has extensions that are not part of the Ada standard: https://docs.adacore.com/gnat_rm-docs/html/gnat_rm/gnat_rm/gnat_language_extensions.html https://docs.adacore.com/gnat_rm-docs/html/gnat_rm/gnat_rm/g... I don't have a close relationship with AdaCore and do not know what they are planning for their Rust toolchain. That said, I would be surprised if they do not add features to ensure Rust plays nicely with their other products and give their Rust toolchain competitive advantages in the safety critical space. I do not see any documentation or details on their website yet, but it also looks like their Rust toolchain is not released yet.

Ada does not have any formalized FFI with Rust at this time; just C, COBOL, and Fortran: http://ada-auth.org/standards/22rm/html/RM-B.html http://ada-auth.org/standards/22rm/html/RM-B.html AdaCore has a Rust toolchain: https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust

sheepshear 3y ago
I know, thank you, but I'm asking about the "curated" language features gp is criticizing. AdaCore does make Ada language extensions (who else would push the language forward these days?), but I didn't think they had any for rust, which is why I'm asking.
- galangalalgol 3y ago
  > GNAT Pro for Rust offers yearly updates that incorporate selected, recent enhancements from the upstream development. We make sure the result is a stable, tested Rust toolchain that’s ready to be used and supported for years to come. https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust https://www.adacore.com/gnatpro-rust Edit: not so worried about the extensions, more worried they will keep re-releasing 1.68 forever with features added only as people clamor for them. And security fixes wedged into old code. That is in effect forking the language.
  - sheepshear 3y ago
    The direct competition between Ferrocene and AdaCore should take care of that. In any case, the compiler wouldn't be certified if they didn't vet the new features. These companies can't control what gets added to the language, and it might take longer than a year to vet future changes. Their statement is an upfront, no-bull fyi about how reality works. I highly doubt it's a statement of intent to stagnate. It would kind of defeat the purpose of switching away from a stagnated language and ecosystem.
    - galangalalgol 3y ago
      I can imagine no use case where ripping out features from upstream reduces risk vs adding it. I agree it makes no sense to stagnate, but I am familiar with the certified compiler space, and what I have described is exactly what I have witnessed. Compilers that are based on ancient versions of open source compilers, and have code incorporated from various point releases since then to minimize the amount of recertification necessary.
      - sheepshear 3y ago
        What happens when a new feature holds up the certification process for some reason? There are only two possible options, and they both suck: 1. Stay on the last certified version until everything is certified. 2. Incorporate the parts that can be certified.
        galangalalgol 3y ago
        The ferrous option appears to be 3. upstream changes that make certification of the new feature easier and then proceed.
        sheepshear 3y ago
        If that's still an option, then they haven't reached the point yet where they have to choose. They're promising yearly updates. I'm asking what happens when a new upstream feature has already gone uncertified for one full year. Either they blow past the deadline and release nothing for over a year, or they ship what's currently available. There's no third option. Ferrous doesn't have a time machine, and AdaCore is just explicitly saying that they'll give you what they have at least once a year.
  - thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
    >> That is in effect forking the language. It feels like the effectiveness and success of Rust could make that happen. Different industries have different needs and will want the language to meet their needs. Rust needs more funding, labor, and organization to create an official language standard to prevent it from fragmenting.
    - galangalalgol 3y ago
      Ferrous created a language specification. https://github.com/ferrocene/specification https://github.com/ferrocene/specification They do say any differences between it and upstream behavior or documentation is a defect in the spec, not upstream. So it isn't authoritative. Unless we all decide it is.
      - thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
        They have explicitly stated that a Rust language specification is a non-goal for Ferrocene: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thesuperbigfrog&next=37769361# https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=thesuperbigfrog&next...
        Argorak 3y ago
        There's an ongoing discussion about potential adoption into upstream, though. The thing here is: it would be harmful if we, Ferrous Systems, claimed or even be confused with a more general Rust spec. That's a) the privilege of the Rust project and b) problematic if consumers were to understand it that way.
        zozbot234 3y ago
        Doesn't Rust have a Reference manual already? A "spec" just wouldn't be very meaningful given the lack of independent implementations. But to the extent that the reference manual doesn't suffice for documenting the language, that's a defect which could and should be fixed.
- thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
  >> AdaCore does make Ada language extensions (who else would push the language forward these days?), but I didn't think they had any for rust, which is why I'm asking. Correct, AdaCore / GNAT has extensions that are not part of the Ada standard: https://docs.adacore.com/gnat_rm-docs/html/gnat_rm/gnat_rm/gnat_language_extensions.html https://docs.adacore.com/gnat_rm-docs/html/gnat_rm/gnat_rm/g... I don't have a close relationship with AdaCore and do not know what they are planning for their Rust toolchain. That said, I would be surprised if they do not add features to ensure Rust plays nicely with their other products and give their Rust toolchain competitive advantages in the safety critical space. I do not see any documentation or details on their website yet, but it also looks like their Rust toolchain is not released yet.