You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
13 points

Didn’t Rust itself used to have a compiler written in a different language? I mean, obviously it would’ve had to at some point but I think I remember reading about them abandoning it once they didn’t need it. Why not use that?

permalink
report
reply
14 points
*

If you had read the article, you’d know!

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

You can technically do it, but it’s a convoluted path. The article talks about it. Basically to bootstrap that way you need to go through a lot of versions of rust, compile rust 0.7 in ocaml, compile ocaml in scheme, and compile scheme in C using gcc. For gcc you need to compile a chain of versions back to when it was written in C instead of C++, plus the whole TinyCC bootstrapping path.

edit: had listed scala instead of ocaml

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

compile rust 0.7 in scala

Not sure if there was another rewrite, but AFAIK (and the article agrees with me) rustc was originally written in Ocaml

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Yeah, I wrote the wrong language. I tend to lump those together in my head as ‘big multi-paradigm languages I haven’t bothered to learn yet.’

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Ah okay. The article was a little over my head so I mostly skimmed it. This makes sense what you’re saying though. It’s easy to forget the level of bootstrapping they’re trying to do is all the way to assembly.

It’s the sort of thing if you think about too long you’ll get paranoid and start using Gentoo exclusively lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Rust

!rust@programming.dev

Create post

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits
  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

Community stats

  • 596

    Monthly active users

  • 886

    Posts

  • 3.8K

    Comments