this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
20 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

7232 readers
5 users here now

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)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BB_C@programming.dev -3 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Ah, the good old RHEL promise of quality, stability, and security.

Can't wait for the ~~CentOS~~ Alma version... oh wait, no copyleft!

I will stick with ~~arch~~ rustc, thank you very much.

[–] snaggen@programming.dev 12 points 2 years ago (7 children)

Well, of course you should stick to rustc if you don't need the certification. I get the impression you mix up thing and the purpose of a certified compiler.

Ferrous Systems is working on certifying a specific version of rustc, and hence make it possible to use rust for projects where such certification is required. And certification is required for things like programming medical equipment. If you are hooked in to life support, it is good if the compiler did the thing it was supposed to do.... a crash in such programs can be fatal in a very literal way.

Also, notice that they try to do this without forking and by contributing upstream.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's something that I never understood for other certified toolchain. What is a value of a certified toolchain containing known bugs, including critical and/or security bugs that are fixed upstream?

[–] BB_C@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

bureaucratic procedure

Not all verification/certification efforts fall under that banner of course. And some of them do provide value.

But the answer to your question is simply:
bureaucratic procedure

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)