Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Source for Fuschia Rust Ban #3

Open
carbotaniuman opened this issue Oct 27, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Source for Fuschia Rust Ban #3

carbotaniuman opened this issue Oct 27, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@carbotaniuman
Copy link

carbotaniuman commented Oct 27, 2020

Recently, the Fuschia OS Team at Google decided to ban Rust's for use in Fuschia microkernel

This is weird because it used in Fuschia

@slightknack
Copy link
Owner

slightknack commented Oct 27, 2020

You're right, this statement is incorrect. InitialProposal.md Is the initial proposal, with minor edits, as it was originally published. Fuchsia not banning Rust was first addressed here, and then later acknowledged here. I think an addendum should be added clarifying that that statement is incorrect or the removal of that phrase would be a good idea. Would you mind opening a quick PR pointing out that this is indeed the case? Just a small blockquote pointing to the discussion with a comment will do. If you're busy, I wouldn't mind opening a quick PR. Thanks for bringing that to my attention 😄

@slightknack
Copy link
Owner

slightknack commented Oct 27, 2020

By the way, here's Fuchsia's current Programming Language Policy. From the policy:

  • Rust is approved for use throughout the Fuchsia Platform Source Tree, with the following exceptions:
    • kernel. The Zircon kernel is built using a restricted set of technologies that have established industry track records of being used in production operating systems.

Rust is not approved for use withing the Zircon microkernel, though this seems to be more because of it's novelty. A stable ABI is a good step towards maturing a language, which is what I believe the original reasoning behind this statement to be. Hope that this clears things up.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants