Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 433 posts

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#211

Post by cozzyd »

cschep wrote: post #85
johnisgood wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will leave this here for the future: $ ldd /usr/bin/git linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007f69c2d64000) libpcre2-8.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpcre2-8.so.0 (0x00007f69c2c81000) libz.so.1 => /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0x00007f69c2c67000) libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007f69c2616000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f69c2d66000) $ ls -alh /usr/bin/git -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4.0M Aug 25 11:40 /usr/b…

Ok, I'll bite. While we are on Hacker News, this is still an enormously obtuse way to communicate. Are you saying that as users of git we will be negatively affected by deps being added and build times going up? Do you have evidence of that from past projects adding rust? Why not just say that??

Git is already an uncomfortably large binary for embedded applications. Rust binaries tend to be even more bloated.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#212

Post by motorest »

oreally wrote: post #179
IshKebab wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing you aren't a software engineer based on this comment, but the difference between programming languages is tangible and meaningful. It isn't like human languages where they're mostly basically the same and achieve the same thing. And code switching between languages is not hard at all.

It's hilarious that you can assume such a thing just by a couple of words on the internet. Or maybe I'm not a 'software engineer' by your standards because unlike your closed group of SWEs I'm a lot less focused on resume padding and keeping my codebase sane and not exploding in complexity. I should specify - it's hard in that it's troublesome to have to code switch and do a bunch of recall before working on the thin…

> I should specify - it's hard in that it's troublesome to have to code switch and do a bunch of recall before working on the thing.

You don't sound like you have any experience working on software projects. I can tell you it's not hard to switch between programming languages. If anything, the difficulty level is placed on onboarding onto projects you are not familiar with, but the programming language in use is far from being a relevant factor if you already are familiar with it.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#213

Post by conradev »

IshKebab wrote: post #162
conradev wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Changing well-tested code is unsafe.

I mean if you want Git to never change you're free to stick with the current version forever . I'm sure that will work well.

I obviously don’t think that is wise, but Git is literally designed with this in mind: https://git-scm.com/docs/repository-version/2.39.0

Just like SQLite has an explicit compatibility guarantee through 2050. You literally do not have to update if you do not want to.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#214

Post by Yoric »

kazinator wrote: post #126
JoshTriplett wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust can't support a platform when that platform's vendors just provide a proprietary C compiler and nothing else (no LLVM, no GCC). Perhaps someone could reverse-engineer it, but ultimately a platform with zero support from any FOSS toolchain is unlikely to get Rust support anytime soon.

Reverse that: "C can't support a platform when that platform's vendors just provide a proprietary Rust compiler and nothing else".

Seems to me that that is equally true and doesn't remove any validity from the argument.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#215

Post by MarsIronPI »

1718627440 wrote: post #135
loeg wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think any new, Git-relevant platform is going to gain C compiler support via anything other than Clang/LLVM?

Code doesn't need to "gain C compiler support", that's the point of having a language standard.

Which Rust still does not have. If serious projects like Git and Linux are adopting Rust, the Rust team might want to consider writing a spec.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#216

Post by mhh__ »

sebtron wrote: post #98

I am curious, what is the reason behind introducing Rust in Git? I am not familiar with Git development, I am just a user. But my impression is that it is already a complete tool that won't require much new code to be written. Fixes and improvements here and there, sure, but that does not seem like a good reason to start using a new language. In contrast, I understand why adding it to e.g. Linux development makes sen…

git feels complete until you use a tool like jj or git-branchless (latter of which has things like in-memory merges in rust)

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#217

Post by squigz »

jlarocco wrote: post #151
detaro wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of funny to see f-ing HPE with 60k employees somehow being labeled as the poor underdog that should be supported by the open-source community for free and can't be expected to take care of software running on their premium hardware for banks etc by themselves.

I think you misread my comment because I didn't say anything like that. In any case HPE may have 60k employees but they're still working to create a smaller platform. It actually demonstrates the point I was making. If a company with 60k employees can't keep up then what chance do startups and smaller companies have?

HP made nearly $60b last year. They can fund the development of the tools they need for their 50 year old system that apparently powers lots of financial institutions. It's absurd to blame volunteer developers for not wanting to bend over backwards, just to ensure these institutions have the absolute latest git release, which they certainly do not need.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#218

Post by riedel »

lame_lexem wrote: post #112
riedel wrote: post #86

Given that rust only works on e.g. cygwin recently (and still does not build many crates: i try to compile jujutsu and failed), this is a big blow to portability IMHO. While I try to like rust, I think making it mandatory for builds of essential tools like git is really too early.

jj has msvc builds and is still tire 1 target maybe something particular about your configuration?

I want it to be cygwin native, i.e. passing calls through the cygwin posix layer and not use the windows binary. Sure I can use the windows binary, but that is a different thing.

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#219

Post by riedel »

sunshowers wrote: post #173
riedel wrote: post #86

Given that rust only works on e.g. cygwin recently (and still does not build many crates: i try to compile jujutsu and failed), this is a big blow to portability IMHO. While I try to like rust, I think making it mandatory for builds of essential tools like git is really too early.

?? I build Jujutsu and many other Rust programs from source on Windows. Rust has a much better Windows story than C and bash do, due to its heritage as a language built by Mozilla for Firefox.

As said before I wasn't complaining about windows, but rather of not so common posix layers like cygwin [0]. Most C posix compliant stuff compiles in my experience.

[0] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/137819

Re: Git: Introduce Rust and announce it will become mandatory in the build system

#220

Post by nicoburns »

jlarocco wrote: post #204
nicoburns wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a company with 60k employees can't keep up then what chance do startups and smaller companies have? They build on open source infrastructure like LLVM, which a smaller company will probably be doing anyway.

Sure, but let's not pretend that doesn't kill diversity and entrench a few big players.

The alternative is killing diversity of programming languages, so it's hard to win either way.
Post reply on HN