Re: The Case for Rust (in the base system)

Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 10:14 AM Gleb Popov wrote:
> 
>     On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 7:51 PM Alan Somers wrote:
>      > To
>      > summarize, the cost is that it would double our build times.
> 
>     Would it? From what I remember, a lot of rust's build time comes from
>     building its own LLVM. Can we reuse our base LLVM for Rust-in-base?
> 
> 
> No. That's not possible in general.  Rust needs its own special thing 
> that is not well tested fit the non rust case.
> 
Rust has followed vanilla LLVM since 8.0 and they have supported the 
external LLVM path since then. However, they use the shared library, LIT 
and a few other extras, all of which we don't build or include in base. 
They also have narrow LLVM version support windows, with only LLVM 15 
and later supported on Rust 1.74 and later. Further, release cycles are 
about every month, which maybe unless we stick strictly to Editions 
(language standards like C11, C++17, et al), sound like a problem for 
-RELEASEs.

-- 
Charlie Li
...nope, still don't have an exit line.