(apologies top-posting, strange mobile mailer). i would expect in that case that the Rust Foundation to work closely with Certification Mark Licensees, and to come to an accommodation, defining a subset if necessary.
if the gcc developers can clearly enunciate why shipping a "borrow checker" (whatever that is) is unreasonable, the Certification Mark Holder has to take that into consideration. without knowing full details i would expect it to be a third party library of some kind (rather than libgcc.a) Certification Mark Holders *have* to act FRAND otherwise they lose the Certification Mark aside: it is reasonable for a Certification Mark Holder to require full compliance, they are after all the Custodians of the Language, and one would not expect a broken (non-compliant) compiler to actually be distributed, regardless of a Certification Mark. thus i think you'll find that the usual "pre-alpha alpha beta" release cycles which would and would not naturally be released for distribution fit directly and one-to-one with what a Certification Mark Holder would and would not authorise. regarding missing tests: well, tough titty on the Certification Mark Holder. if they cannot define the Compliance Test Suite they cannot tell people they are non-compliant, can they! thus although quirky it all works out. (whereas telling people what patches they can and cannot apply just pisses them off). l. On July 18, 2022 7:32:25 PM GMT+01:00, Florian Weimer <fwei...@redhat.com> wrote: >* lkcl via Gcc: > >> if the Rust Foundation were to add an extremely simple phrase >> >> "to be able to use the word rust in a distributed compiler your >> modifications must 100% pass the test suite without modifying >> the test suite" >> >> then all the problems and pain goes away. > >No. It would actually make matters worse for GCC in this case because >the stated intent is to ship without a borrow checker (“There are no >immediate plans for a borrow checker as this is not required to compile >rust code”, <https://rust-gcc.github.io/>, retrieved 2022-07-18). >There >are of course tests for the borrow checker in the Rust test suite, and >those that check for expected compiler errors will fail with GCC. > >Thanks, >Florian
