rustc-dev-guide VS lang-team

yes, it's possible! that list doesn't exist today but i would love to create it. i wrote a draft a few years ago before shifting to other work; someone recently expressed interest in reviving that project: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/pull/1463

<3 i'm glad you enjoyed it

It's possible - you could open an issue on the rustc-dev-guide repo if you'd like. https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/

I'm very confident that this would be well received! I'm not sure where the source code for rustdoc lives, but I know that the internals getting started guide is here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/blob/master/src/rustdoc.md. That would be a good place to start if you're looking into how the HTML is generated.

Do you have links to any good info about how much rustc reuses from previous runs? This is the first time i hear about reuse at the function level. I guess the rustc-dev-guide would be a good place for me to start?

Inspired by the rust compiler, you could represent the entire state of the application as a graph of operations with inputs and outputs. You can hash all the inputs and use that to memoize the operations, so that you don't have to repeat them, you can cache them in memory or on disk, and it helps you track which parts of the app state actually change between user operations and you can then be sure you put all the changes in the undo/redo stack, and so that you don't have to store duplicate copies of things that don't change. (How's that for a run-on sentence?) You could run a general binary diff algorithm between subsequent versions of the same operation with different inputs to try to reduce the memory used by storing the different versions, and have specialized diff algorithms for specific types of data. (How do you identify related operations? How much CPU does this use?) You can have a background task that compresses older versions with LZ4 or zstd. You can have a background task that saves older versions on-disk when there's memory pressure.

I contributed a couple small bugfixes for issues I ran into along the way as well. 1, 2

It's rustdoc: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/blob/master/src...

> Rustdoc actually uses the rustc internals directly. It lives in-tree with the compiler and standard library. This chapter is about how it works. For information about Rustdoc's features and how to use them, see the Rustdoc book. For more details about how rustdoc works, see the "Rustdoc internals" chapter.

The Rust team did a deep dive on the bug in 2020, which has some more details that might be helpful to understanding what's going on: https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/blob/master/design-me....

I haven't been following this closely, so I looked it up and it looks like that's not going to happen for the foreseeable future unfortunately:

https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/122

Kind of a shame, but wrapper types work well enough that I understand. It does look like if there was someone with enough resources to make it happen that they'd be receptive to it.

Did you read the link the original comment posted? I think that explains the idea rather well https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/122

A quick search pulled up this as a likely candidate for most recent discussion of it but it goes back at least to 2016 with this RFC.

There have been at least one proposal and RFC in the past that seem to be deferred or closed due to bandwidth issues.

That's what Rust does, and it's considered a problem (that the devs are regrettably unable to reasonably solve) rather than a good thing.

Lang had some conversations about this: https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/139

The design of Rust panics unconditionally aborts the program if you panic while unwinding, and some people even want to abort if you panic in Drop.

> Better interoperability

AFAIK, the examples you give all target a basic C ABI [0] or can be made to target the same ABI. In Rust, it means targeting wasm32-unknown-emscripten

The Rust team is also working on a "WASM ABI"[1] which would be useful in taking advantage of stuff like multi-value returns, and other compilers could just choose to target that. More likely, the C ABI on WASM will be updated to account for missing features, and that'll be the standard for interoperability in the WASM ecosystem.

[0]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/tool-conventions/blob/main/Ba...

[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/blob/master/design-me...