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

Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

graydon2.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 54 posts

Re: Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

#3

Post by superkuh »

fcoury wrote: post #2

Not sure why, but I am getting 403 Forbidden, so if you are getting the same here's an archive.is link https://archive.is/UH5fg

You're not the only one getting blocked. I emailed dreamwidth about this in the past and they say it's something their upstream network host does and they cannot even fix it if their site users wanted to fix it. They're a somewhat limited and broken host partially repackaging some other company's services.

    >Dreamwidth Studios Support: I'm sorry about the frustrations you're having. The "semi-randomly selected to solve a CAPTCHA" interstitial with a visual CAPTCHA is coming from our hosting provider, not from us: ... and we don't have any control over whether or not someone from a particular network is shown a CAPTCHA or not because we aren't the ones who control the restriction.
This also applies to the 403's.

Re: Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

#6

Post by kimixa »

> Modern clang and gcc won't compile the LLVM used back then (C++ has changed too much)

Is this due to changing default values for the standard used, and would be "fixed" by adding "std=xxx" to the CXXFLAGS?

I've successfully built ~2011 era LLVM with no issues with the compiler itself (after that option change) using gcc last year - there were a couple of bugs in the llvm code though that I had to workaround (mainly relying on transitive includes from the standard library, or incorrect LLVM code that is detected by the newer compilers)

One of the big pain points I have with c++ is the dogmatic support of "old" code, I'd argue to the current version's detriment. But because of that I've never had an issue with code version backwards compatibility.

Re: Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

#7

Post by Sharlin »

jasonthorsness wrote: post #5

The difficulty in reproducing builds and steps even from a time as recent as 2011 is somewhat disturbing; will technology stabilize or is this going to get even worse? At what point do we end up with something in-use that we can’t make anymore?

Enter Vinge's programmer-archaeologists!

Re: Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

#8

Post by bee_rider »

jasonthorsness wrote: post #5

The difficulty in reproducing builds and steps even from a time as recent as 2011 is somewhat disturbing; will technology stabilize or is this going to get even worse? At what point do we end up with something in-use that we can’t make anymore?

I think we must have some software in use for which the compiler or the source code just isn’t around anymore. It probably isn’t a massive problem. There’s just a slow trickle of tech we can’t economically reproduce, but we replace it with better stuff. Or, if it was really crucial, it would become worth paying for, right?

Re: Retrobootstrapping Rust for some reason

#9

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

bee_rider wrote: post #8
jasonthorsness wrote: post #5

The difficulty in reproducing builds and steps even from a time as recent as 2011 is somewhat disturbing; will technology stabilize or is this going to get even worse? At what point do we end up with something in-use that we can’t make anymore?

I think we must have some software in use for which the compiler or the source code just isn’t around anymore. It probably isn’t a massive problem. There’s just a slow trickle of tech we can’t economically reproduce, but we replace it with better stuff. Or, if it was really crucial, it would become worth paying for, right?

There was a story where Microsoft patched a program for which they likely lost the source: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-ap...
Post reply on HN