HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
rust-lang
compiler-builtins
Rust2019–2026
rust-lang / compiler-builtins

compiler-builtins

Rust implementations of compiler-rt and libm

8Distinct people
8Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
530GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Rust implementations of compiler-rt and libm

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:03:16 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year8 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2019-11-16 12:47:42 UTC to 2026-07-01 04:51:50 UTC.

01232019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

8 sources
Rust does not rely on syscalls or libraries on embedded targets, which is what the #![no_std] marker at the top of the project indicates. On some platforms, like ESP32, Rust can make calls into the RTOS and don't need that marker, but other embedded targets don't provide access to the std crate and you need to interact with peripherals from Rust or by interfacing with C or assembly. Rust's only requirement is that memcpy, memmove, memset, memcmp, bcmp, and strlen are available, and it can provide them if needed: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins
In 1.38 Millimeter Microcontroller
The runtime thing is the easy part. I was wondering about the stack probes, which require LLVM support. There's a comment in the sources that suggest it's still x86-only, but that may be outdated: “ //! Finally it's worth noting that at the time of this writing LLVM only has //! support for stack probes on x86 and x86_64. There's no support for stack //! probes on any other architecture like ARM or PowerPC64. LLVM I'm sure would //! be more than welcome to accept such a change! ” https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/blob/master/s...
In Why do we need for an Undefined Behavior Annex to C++
I believe between - this - https://docs.rs/gimli/0.23.0/gimli/ - https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins - https://github.com/redox-os/relibc - https://lld.llvm.org/ It finally possible to make Linux binaries in a high level language not involving anything written in C at build-time or run-time!!! (And I think with CraneLift + -Z build-std, but without any libc, one should be able to skip linking separately-compiled object files too, and thus skip LLD and C++.)
In 30% Faster Rust Build Times using Cranelift instead of the LLVM
Very nice post! I remember helping to port the 128 bit integer functions in compiler-rt to Rust years ago [0], because clang only supported 128 bit integers on 64 bit platforms, but the goal of Rust was to support them on all platforms that Rust supports. Since then, all algorithms in compiler-rt have been ported to Rust and live in the compiler-builtins crate. This [1] is the source code file for unsigned division. The actual logic is inside a macro and used to implement both 128 bit division in terms of 64 bit numbers and 64 bit division in terms of 32 bit numbers. I wonder if similar optimizations can be done to that code. [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38482 [0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/blob/master/s...
In Optimizing 128-bit Division

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.