specification
crater
specification | crater | |
---|---|---|
18 | 23 | |
386 | 615 | |
0.5% | 2.3% | |
8.0 | 7.8 | |
2 days ago | about 1 month ago | |
Python | Rust | |
- | - |
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.
specification
-
Improving Interoperability Between Rust and C++
Many people misunderstand how software is written in regulated industries, and assume that a standard is necessary. In practice, this is not the case. Note that Ferrocene[1] had to produce a specification[2] in order to qualify the compiler. But there isn't a requirement that it must be a standard in any way, only that it describes how the Ferrocene compiler works. Nor that it be accepted by upstream.
1: https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/officially-qualified-ferroc...
2: https://github.com/ferrocene/specification
-
Aerugo – RTOS for aerospace uses written in Rust
If by "no standard" you mean that there is no language specification for rust, then there is no standard. However, a language specification is not sufficient to verify program correctness, nor is it required.
A standard may (and the C standard for example does) leave parts of the behavior as "implementation specific" and there's quite a few edge cases - and that's not even talking about "undefined behavior", of which there is plenty. An even in the behavior that is neither implementation specific nor undefined you'll find enough rope to hang yourself (all the beautiful pointers).
On the other hand, the rust language - while having no formal spec - is fairly well described, in the form of its RFCs and testsuite. We (the ferrocene team) were able to derive a descriptive specification from the existing description fairly easily. So while there is no ISO standard, and no spec that would be sufficient to write a competing implementation, there is a description of what the language behaves like. You can read up on it at https://spec.ferrocene.dev/
As for verification of correct behavior of such a program, you can employ a host of different techniques depending on what your requirements are - down to verification of the produced bytecode by means of blackbox testing or other.
-
Progress toward a GCC-based Rust compiler
They created a specification for Ferrocene because Rust does not yet have a language standard:
https://spec.ferrocene.dev/
>> But does the language need a standard?
Yes, Rust needs a standard.
>> And if so, then for what purpose?
For the same purpose that all standards have--to formally define it in writing.
Ferrocene's web site (https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/) shows that it meets the ISO 26262 standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_26262).
Why does ISO 26262 matter? What purpose does it serve? Couldn't a vehicle manufacturer just say "our vehicles are safe"? Which would you trust more: a vehicle that is verified to meet ISO 26262 standards, or a vehicle whose manufacturer tells you "it's safe"?
-
Officially Qualified – Ferrocene
https://github.com/ferrocene/specification
They do say any differences between it and upstream behavior or documentation is a defect in the spec, not upstream. So it isn't authoritative. Unless we all decide it is.
-
A Guide to Undefined Behavior in C and C++
>> The spec does not define the software. The software is as the software does. Having or not having a spec doesn't protect from bugs - people do.
>> What you're taking about is covering one's ass, not specification.
They are related.
In safety-critical software, bugs can cause people to die. Without a spec, no one will use Rust for safety critical software. It would be too risky and no company would accept that level of risk.
For example if software that controls an airplane is written in Rust and an error occurs during flight, what happens? The software can't just panic and crash or the airplane might crash.
The Ferrocene project (https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/) is working on producing a safety-critical Rust specification (https://github.com/ferrocene/specification) because having a language specification matters for safety-critical work.
-
A Decade of Rust, and Announcing Ferrocene
I'd like to clarify a little here: There's an ISO certifiation in here - but it's not an ISO standard for the language.
Essentially, the ISO 26262 certification verifies that the compiler release process conforms to a certain standard. It does not create an ISO standard for rust, not does it aim to. At part of the certification process we had to write a spec for the rust language, but it is a descriptive spec of how certain aspects of the rust language behave for one specific release of the compiler.
The certification builds on this to ensure that tests catch deviations from the spec, known problems are documented etc. So rust as a language is unaffected, as is the rust project. The spec is open source and might be useful to others, you can find it at https://spec.ferrocene.dev/
The target sectors for ISO 26262 and related industrial certification are clearly sectors that require such certification: automotive, medical, etc.
Ferrocene itself however, is not only the ISO certified downstream of the rust compiler, it also offers for example long term support and tracking of known issues which the rust project does not provide. This is also important for certain applications that do not strictly require certifications.
- Ferrocene Language Specification
-
Rust has been forked to the Crab Language
>> Rust is defined by the implementation.
Hopefully not for long:
https://github.com/ferrocene/specification
https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/the-ferrocene-language-spec...
Hopefully Ferrocene can lead to Rust itself being standardized.
To me, it seems inevitable that there will be multiple implementations of Rust, especially if Rust continues to be more widely adopted and used in new domains.
I would also not be surprised if Rust were to adopt optional language extensions for specialized use cases, similar to Ada's language annexes:
http://www.ada-auth.org/standards/22rm/html/RM-1-1-2.html
Why? Because the Rust implementation you use for video game programming does not need all of the same features as the Rust implementation that you use for safety-critical embedded systems (for example: railroad control software).
-
GCC 13 and the state of gccrs
That’s an easy enough problem to solve (though time consuming), and Ferrocene is working on it. Having >1 compiler implement the spec is just a human fuzz test that finds edge cases, and that’s a good thing.
-
Rust in Automotive
I don't know what ISO-26262 requires, but for IEC-61508 only requires "The language should be fully and unambiguously defined." - which I think Ferrocene has taken a decent stab at with https://spec.ferrocene.dev , and an accompanying ISO standard is not a hard requirement.
crater
-
Semver violations are common, better tooling is the answer
yup, they reference it as an inspiration: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater
it's probably impossible to automate an entire ecosystem, and there is value to enabling a tighter integration within a project ecosystem (a subset of the language ecosystem).
-
Trip Summer ISO C++ standards meeting (Varna, Bulgaria)
Rather than hypothesising about an imagined tool you could look at the actual tool which of course is in Rust's source code repo: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater
> new proposed C++ changes - are checked against only easily and "well-known" accessible package.
Now that I have, so to say, shown you mine, lets see yours. Where is the tool to perform these checks in C++?
-
GCC 13 and the state of gccrs
The "break things" part of "move fast" is not essential, Rust cares so much about breakage they literally compile and run the tests for every crate on crates.io and github using a tool called Crater. They do this just to test changes, even for stuff thats documented to be unstable, because thats just courtesy. And tooling makes it trivial to switch between Rust versions.
-
Do one thing, and do it well, or not.
The bot's named Crater if you want to look into it more.
-
Improving Rust compile times to enable adoption of memory safety
See https://github.com/rust-lang/crater
-
Discussion about the state of neovim's plugin ecosystem
Rust compiler developers use a tool called Crater to test potentially breaking compiler changes on all crates (Rust's name for libraries) uploaded to the official repository. If plugin stability is the issue, maybe a solution along these lines would be better than merging these plugins to Neovim's core?
-
Experienced C++ users: what do you like about Rust? How would you sell it to other C++ users?
https://github.com/rust-lang/crater is the bot they use to test proposed compiler/stdlib changes against slices of the crates.io library up to and including "all of it".
-
Data-driven performance optimization with Rust and Miri
The tool you're referring to is called Crater: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater.
- GHC 9.4.2 regresses being able to do math on aarch64
-
Rust for Linux officially merged
I'm pretty certain this isn't actually true. You should look at the editions, etc. Rust also has an insane guarantee which I am certain C/C++ don't offer: It rebuilds its entire library ecosystem each time it ships to make sure nothing breaks (https://crater.rust-lang.org). I've never seen an instance were old code didn't compile on a new compiler. Rust isn't forwards compatible (new code compiles on an old compiler) of course, but what is?
What are some alternatives?
bc - An implementation of the POSIX bc calculator with GNU extensions and dc, moved away from GitHub. Finished, but well-maintained.
FluentValidation - A popular .NET validation library for building strongly-typed validation rules.
stc - Speedy TypeScript type checker
actix-net - A collection of lower-level libraries for composable network services.
crab - A community fork of a language named after a plant fungus. All of the memory-safe features you love, now with 100% less bureaucracy!
Dapper - Dapper - a simple object mapper for .Net [Moved to: https://github.com/DapperLib/Dapper]
polonius - Defines the Rust borrow checker.
AutoMapper - A convention-based object-object mapper in .NET.
windows-rs - Rust for Windows
rust-prehistory - historical archive of rust pre-publication development
compiler-team - A home for compiler team planning documents, meeting minutes, and other such things.
NUnit - NUnit Framework