I often see Rust mentioned at the same time as MIT-type licenses.

Is it just a cultural thing that people who write Rust dislike Libre copyleft licenses? Or is it baked in to the language somehow?

Edit: It has been pointed out that I meant to say “copyleft”, not “libre”, so edited the title and body likewise.

  • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    IIRC Same compiler version doesn’t mean the ABI will be the same. Each compilation may produce different representation of data structures in the binary. Depending on the optimization and other things.

    • 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ugh, that would complicate things. If that’s the case, all I can say is that’s really negligent (and goes into what I originally said about lack of stable ABI really ruining Rust for me — technically I said static linking but that’s really the core issue)

      • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, and there’s no plan to stabilize the ABI because it’s developing.

        You can use C ABI for some data formats, but you’re limited on what you can use (mostly primitives). There’s a crate stable-abi or abi-stable that provides a way to do things to keep it stable, but since it’s external crate it has limitations.

        I know it’s frustrating because I am writing something in rust that loads functions in runtime. I thought it’d be easy because programs written in C do it all the time. Rust gives a lot of advantages but working on dynamic loading hasn’t been fun. And there aren’t a lot of resources about this either.