From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from secure.elehost.com (secure.elehost.com [185.209.179.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A7F5A4A for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 02:57:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexbridge.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexbridge.com X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at secure.elehost.com Received: from Mazikeen (cpebc4dfb928313-cmbc4dfb928310.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.228.251.108] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by secure.elehost.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with ESMTPSA id 40B2s0cQ1732245 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 11 Jan 2024 02:54:01 GMT Reply-To: From: To: "'Elijah Newren'" Cc: "'Taylor Blau'" , "'Junio C Hamano'" , "'Dragan Simic'" , References: <006b01da4412$96c6c500$c4544f00$@nexbridge.com> <007c01da4420$10a7b700$31f72500$@nexbridge.com> <008701da442f$b2dfe420$189fac60$@nexbridge.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Introducing Rust into the Git project Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 21:57:44 -0500 Organization: Nexbridge Inc. Message-ID: <009c01da4439$f70beef0$e523ccd0$@nexbridge.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-ca Thread-Index: AQNL0k5wzhXZATyUnQ76Vxjn4eCV+QKEQ1wBALH7sDwDPprtZwK9Rr3fAtB2bewByXD01gDMKZblA0KzuhetYfeX4A== On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 9:21 PM, Elijah Newren wrote: >On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:44=E2=80=AFPM wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:59 PM, Elijah Newren wrote: >[...] >> >Would you be okay with the following alternative: requiring that all >> >Rust code be optional for now? >> > >> >(In other words, allow you to build with USE_RUST=3D0, or something >> >like that. And then we have both a Rust and a C implementation of >> >anything that is required for backward compatibility, while any new >> >Rust-only stuff would not be included in your build.) >> >> To address the immediate above, I assume this means that platform >> maintainers will be responsible for developing non-portable >> implementations that duplicate Rust functionality > >This doesn't at all sound like what I thought I said. The whole = proposal was so that >folks like NonStop could continue using Git with no more work than = setting >USE_RUST=3D0 at build time. > >Why do you feel you'd need to duplicate any functionality? I think I misunderstood. What I took from this is that all new = functionality would be in Rust, which would require a custom = implementation in C for platforms that did not have Rust available - if = that is even practical. Did I get that wrong?