There is a scary amount of stuff we could do with cfg flags... But it sounds like asking a lot to commit to that now, while there are still only a handful of Rust users.
Kevin On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Benjamin Striegel <[email protected]> wrote: > This does raise a good question though: post-1.0, will we continue the > current procedure of snapshotting whenever we feel like it, or will we > restrict snapshots to stable releases, as Go plans to do? > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P3BLR31VA8cvLJLfMibSuTdwTuF7WWLux71CYD0eeD8/preview?sle=true > > "The rule we plan to adopt is that the Go 1.3 compiler must compile using > Go 1.2, Go 1.4 must compile using Go 1.3, and so on." > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Brian Anderson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This is an interesting idea, but I don't see it happening for a long time >> if ever: >> >> * The current process is working fine >> * rustc depends on many of the standard libraries, so restricting rustc >> means figuring out how to stick to a fixed subset of those libraries >> * It's a lot of work to make the bootstrap process even *more* complicated >> * For some minor benefits >> >> >> On 06/09/2014 06:34 AM, James Cassidy wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 12:55:00PM +0000, Sanghyeon Seo wrote: >>> >>>> Do you plan to create a cleaner full-bootstrap process? >>>>> By "cleaner" I mean dividing stage-0 to more [sub-]stages, >>>>> which would be well-defined and documented in terms of >>>>> the set of language features it implements. Currently these >>>>> sub-stages are defined by a team member's mood to instruct >>>>> the build-bots to make a snapshot. This kind of bootstrap >>>>> seems to be a black-box. >>>>> >>>> As I understand, there is no plan to do this. "Bootstrap" you are >>>> talking >>>> about is purely theoretical, and I don't think anyone actually >>>> performed it. >>>> In practice, Rust is bootstrapped from the downloaded binary. >>>> >>>> I understand you do not spend resource on such tasks before 1.0, >>>>> but do you think this is a legitimate|sensible request at all? >>>>> Would it be worth the work? >>>>> >>>> Personally, I don't see any value in doing this work. C compilers are >>>> bootstrapped from C compiler binaries. Analogously, the Rust compiler >>>> is bootstrapped from the Rust compiler binary. >>>> >>>> Trying to bootstrap from rustboot would be akin to trying to bootstrap >>>> GCC from last1120c (the oldest C compiler with surviving source code). >>>> An interesting feat of computer archaeology, but not really useful for >>>> anything. >>>> >>>> I think he was more referring to what language features will be >>> allowed in the >>> rust compiler itself where earlier stages would be more restricted so >>> they can >>> be compiled with older rust compilers, for example hopefully rustc 2.0 >>> can be >>> compiled by rustc 1.0. Then later stages could use more features since >>> it will >>> be compiled with the more up to date earlier stage. >>> >>> Currently what features can be used in the compiler itself are just >>> limited to >>> whenever someone decides to compiler a newer stage0 compiler. >>> >>> >>> -- Jim >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rust-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rust-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
