Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
1–10 of 344 posts
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#2Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust:
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#3Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
That is sort of addressed by Theo:
>Such ecosystems come with incredible costs. For instance, rust cannot even compile itself on i386 at present time because it exhausts the address space.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#4Theo is completely ignorant here. I also saw him spout similar inaccuracies in this video: https://youtu.be/fYgG0ds2_UQ?t=2112
Uutils and Redox are setting out to provide POSIX compatible coreutils, and Redox builds from scratch in less than 30 minutes.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#5Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
That is sort of addressed by Theo: >Such ecosystems come with incredible costs. For instance, rust cannot even compile itself on i386 at present time because it exhausts the address space.
People are still using i386? I'd assume even if they are, it's such a tiny minority that it shouldn't be an excuse to hold everyone else back.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#6Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
And Go: https://github.com/ericlagergren/go-coreutils
Does he really not know this or is he ignoring them to make a point?
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#7> So rather than bothering to begin, you wrote an email.
This is where Theo appears to me to be quite different to eg Linus. He plays the man, not the ball, with personal attacks.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is sort of addressed by Theo: >Such ecosystems come with incredible costs. For instance, rust cannot even compile itself on i386 at present time because it exhausts the address space.
People are still using i386? I'd assume even if they are, it's such a tiny minority that it shouldn't be an excuse to hold everyone else back.
Linux supported i386 until 2012, I think in this context it is more likely to refer to pre-Pentium 86 CPUs though (I'm not certain on that)
I've seen i386 multiple times to also refer to any x86 Arch.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#9Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
That is sort of addressed by Theo: >Such ecosystems come with incredible costs. For instance, rust cannot even compile itself on i386 at present time because it exhausts the address space.
Rust fell into the same trap that killed many, many gamedev companies:
Performance matters. Even more than features.
Re: Integrating “safe” languages into OpenBSD?
#10Maybe I'm misunderstanding but there is a pretty serious effort to rewrite all the gnu coreutils in Rust: https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
That is sort of addressed by Theo: >Such ecosystems come with incredible costs. For instance, rust cannot even compile itself on i386 at present time because it exhausts the address space.
This seems like a bit of a trite point unless many rust developers are actually working inside i386. Though the compiler itself might not work very well in i386.
Not many people are whining about our C compiler toolchains not fitting into our microcontrollers.