Re: C aggregate passing (Rust kernel policy)

[Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>]

Hi all,

>> Hmm, I wonder if this is the reason of the persistent hostility that I
>> keep hearing about in the Rust community against alternate
>> implementations of the Rust compiler, such as the one being developed
>> using the GCC backend.  *Since* the aliasing model hasn't been
> 
> I guess you are referring to gccrs, i.e. the new GCC frontend
> developed within GCC (the other one, which is a backend,
> rustc_codegen_gcc, is part of the Rust project, so no hostility there
> I assume).
> 
> In any case, yes, there are some people out there that may not agree
> with the benefits/costs of implementing a new frontend in, say, GCC.
> But that does not imply everyone is hostile. In fact, as far as I
> understand, both Rust and gccrs are working together, e.g. see this
> recent blog post:
> 
>      https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/11/07/gccrs-an-alternative-compiler-for-rust.html

Indeed I want to push back hard against the claim that the Rust community as a 
whole is "hostile" towards gcc-rs. There are a lot of people that do not share 
the opinion that an independent implementation is needed, and there is some (IMO 
justified) concern about the downsides of an independent implementation (mostly 
concerning the risk of a language split / ecosystem fragmentation). However, the 
gcc-rs folks have consistently stated that they are aware of this and intend 
gcc-rs to be fully compatible with rustc by not providing any custom language 
extensions / flags that could split the ecosystem, which has resolved all those 
concerns at least as far as I am concerned. :)

Kind regards,
Ralf