do-not-compile-this-code
compiler-team
do-not-compile-this-code | compiler-team | |
---|---|---|
4 | 46 | |
95 | 380 | |
- | 1.8% | |
3.3 | 6.8 | |
about 1 year ago | 20 days ago | |
Rust | HTML | |
MIT License | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
do-not-compile-this-code
- The key insight is that Rust macros are expanded before/during compilation, i.e. arbitrary code execution during compilation.
- Arbitrary code execution during compilation – rust
-
Arbitrary code execution during compile time - rust
Why is this a language choice for rust? https://github.com/eleijonmarck/do-not-compile-this-code
compiler-team
-
The Rust Calling Convention We Deserve
> Also, why aren't we size-sorting fields already?
We are for struct/enum fields. https://camlorn.net/posts/April%202017/rust-struct-field-reo...
There's even an unstable flag to help catch incorrect assumptions about struct layout. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/457
- Rust proposal for ABI for higher-level languages
-
The Linux Kernel Prepares for Rust 1.77 Upgrade
Are you talking about https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688 ? I think that issue provides a lot of interesting context for this specific improvement.
-
Progress toward a GCC-based Rust compiler
And mips64, which rustc recently dumped support for after their attempt to extort funding/resources from Loongson failed:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/648
This is the biggest problem with the LLVM mentality: they use architecture support as a means to extract support (i.e. salaried dev positions) from hardware companies.
GNU may have annoyingly-higher standards for merging changes, but once it's in there and supported they will keep it for the long haul.
-
Cargo has never frustrated me like npm or pip has. Does Cargo ever get frustrating? Does anyone ever find themselves in dependency hell?
See https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688
- Rust: Drop MIPS to Tier 3
-
There is now a proposal to switch Rustc Nightly to use a parallel frontend
The work has been going on for some time now and it seems we are quite close to it being enabled as a default for nightly builds, I am super thrilled upwards of 20% faster clean builds and possibly more are on the horizon. Hope everything works out without triggering some unseen ICE. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/681 Edit: If you want to discuss this feature reach out on Zulip
-
Rust 1.72.0
I'd recommend reading the MCP[1] they linked regarding the decision as well as their target tier policy [2].
They are dropping tier 1 support for Win 7 and Win 8. That means they are no longer going to guarantee that the project builds on those platforms and passes all tests via CI.
As long as it is feasible they will probably keep CI runs for those platforms and if interested parties step up and provide sufficient maintenance support, it will remain tier 2. i.e a guarantee that it builds on those platforms via CI but not necessarily that all features are supported and guaranteed via passing tests.
If interested parties can provide sufficient maintenance that all tests continue passing, it will be tier 1 in all but name. However the rest of the development community won't waste their time with issues like Win 7 and 8's partial support for UTF-8.
And once CI stops being feasible for the compiler team to host, it'll drop down to tier 3. If there's sufficient interest from the community towards maintaining these targets, in practice you should see comparable support to with tiers 1 or 2 however now any CI will be managed externally by the community and the compiler team will stop worrying about changes that could break compilation on those targets.
TLDR: They aren't saying "it'll no longer work" but rather "if you want it to stay maintained for these targets, you have to pitch in dev hours to maintain it and eventually support the infrastructure to do this because we don't see a reason to continue doing this". So if you care for these targets, you'll have to contribute to keep it maintained.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/651
- Experimental feature gate for `extern "crabi"` ABI
-
Prerequisites for a Windows XP 3D game engine
(The already broken) XP support was removed almost 3 years ago: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/378
What are some alternatives?
libvfio-user - framework for emulating devices in userspace
llvm-mos - Port of LLVM to the MOS 6502 and related processors
ua-parser-js - UAParser.js - Free & open-source JavaScript library to detect user's Browser, Engine, OS, CPU, and Device type/model. Runs either in browser (client-side) or node.js (server-side).
namespacing-rfc - RFC for Packages as Optional Namespaces
cargo-show-asm - cargo subcommand showing the assembly, LLVM-IR and MIR generated for Rust code
libgccjit-patches - Patches awaiting review for libgccjit
skyline-rs - A Rust library for modding Nintendo Switch games using Skyline
qrintf - sprintf accelerator for GCC and Clang
rustc_codegen_gcc - libgccjit AOT codegen for rustc
rustc_codegen_gcc - libgccjit AOT codegen for rustc
rust-delegate - Rust method delegation with less boilerplate
rustsec - RustSec API & Tooling