The discussion highlights significant new features in Rust 1.100, such as the stabilized never type and unused dependency warnings, while sparking a substantive debate over whether the language's lack of a stable ABI is a necessary trade-off for its generic system or an impediment to library distribution. Participants clash between those viewing the current source-only model as sufficient and those arguing that a native stable ABI is essential for practical binary interoperability.
66 readable replies · Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · Supporting reply 3 · Supporting reply 4rust-lang
compiler-team
HTML2021–2025
rust-lang / compiler-team
compiler-team
A home for compiler team planning documents, meeting minutes, and other such things.
18Distinct people
19Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
437GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
A home for compiler team planning documents, meeting minutes, and other such things.
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use was verified in the last source check.
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, 1:49:46 PM UTC.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by year19 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2021-01-11 13:47:58 UTC to 2025-12-12 16:25:19 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2023 | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 1 | 3 |
| 2024 | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 5 | 1 | 4 |
| 2025 | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 0 | 4 |
What Hacker News says
19 sourcesESestebank·Dec 12, 2025
> I can't even get Rust to work here on my slightly older Mac system.
Could you elaborate on that? macOS Sierra (released on 2016) on Intel macs is supported[1][2], which should allow for Macs from late 2009 onward to work. The Intel Mac build is no longer Tier 1 because the project no longer has access to CI machines for them, and 32-bit cross building is hampered by Xcode 14 not shipping the corresponding SDK[3].
1: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/556
2: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/platform-support/app...
3: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118083
In The Tor Project is switching to RustAn interesting bit of history: for a long time Rust maintained first party support for Windows XP, after other parts of ecosystem generally gave up. This was because Firefox needed it.
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/378 (major change proposal to drop Windows XP support) notes this history and links to other relevant pages.
In Unofficial "Tier 4" Rust Target for older Windows versionsRust is investigating using sandboxed WASM for proc macros, but it'll be some time before there's any movement there: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/876
In How we exploited CodeRabbit: From simple PR to RCE and write access on 1M repos"m68k-unknown-linux-gnu" was merged as a Tier-3 target for Rust, wasn't it? [0]
[0] https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/458
In Rust to C compiler – 95.9% test pass rate, odd platforms> First of all, we are fortunate that the I/O safety problem can be addressed now, which safe Rust aims to ensure this in the future. Rust provides the Drop trait to define custom behavior when a value is cleaned up. Thus, we can do something like this...
> We just need to encourage async runtimes to implement this fix.
This likely needs async drop if you need to perform a follow up call to cancel the outstanding tasks or closing the open sockets. Async Drop is currently experimental:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/727
In Async Rust is not safe with io_uringOr, more precisely, reserves the right to do so in a future version. rustc does not currently do this. There are some compiler flags to randomize the struct layout just to make sure that you’re not implicitly depending on the order.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/457
In Writing an NVMe Driver in Rust [pdf]> Also, why aren't we size-sorting fields already?
We are for struct/enum fields. https://camlorn.net/posts/April%202017/rust-struct-field-reo...
There's even an unstable flag to help catch incorrect assumptions about struct layout. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/457
In The Rust calling convention we deserveRust proposal for ABI for higher-level languages
4 points · Open discussionAre you talking about https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688 ? I think that issue provides a lot of interesting context for this specific improvement.
In The Linux Kernel Prepares for Rust 1.77 UpgradeAnd mips64, which rustc recently dumped support for after their attempt to extort funding/resources from Loongson failed:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/648
This is the biggest problem with the LLVM mentality: they use architecture support as a means to extract support (i.e. salaried dev positions) from hardware companies.
GNU may have annoyingly-higher standards for merging changes, but once it's in there and supported they will keep it for the long haul. It's like buying vs renting. It takes a lot more dev hours to get support into GCC, but once it's there, it stays there.
In Progress toward a GCC-based Rust compilerThe tier 3 Windows XP target is no_std only, which makes it useless for the vast majority of developers.
For all intents and purposes Rust is dropping support for anything below Windows 10.
It is suggested in the MCP that a new target can be created for older versions of Windows if members of the community will step up to support it.
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/651
In Rust 1.72.0I'd recommend reading the MCP[1] they linked regarding the decision as well as their target tier policy [2].
They are dropping tier 1 support for Win 7 and Win 8. That means they are no longer going to guarantee that the project builds on those platforms and passes all tests via CI.
As long as it is feasible they will probably keep CI runs for those platforms and if interested parties step up and provide sufficient maintenance support, it will remain tier 2. i.e a guarantee that it builds on those platforms via CI but not necessarily that all features are supported and guaranteed via passing tests.
If interested parties can provide sufficient maintenance that all tests continue passing, it will be tier 1 in all but name. However the rest of the development community won't waste their time with issues like Win 7 and 8's partial support for
Read the rest
UTF-8.
And once CI stops being feasible for the compiler team to host, it'll drop down to tier 3. If there's sufficient interest from the community towards maintaining these targets, in practice you should see comparable support to with tiers 1 or 2 however now any CI will be managed externally by the community and the compiler team will stop worrying about changes that could break compilation on those targets.
TLDR: They aren't saying "it'll no longer work" but rather "if you want it to stay maintained for these targets, you have to pitch in dev hours to maintain it and eventually support the infrastructure to do this because we don't see a reason to continue doing this". So if you care for these targets, you'll have to contribute to keep it maintained.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/651
[2]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/target-tier-policy.html
I have a good news for you. Recently, two IBM employees appeared on Rust's issue tracker and reported their intention to port Rust to AIX.
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/553
In It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++Ah, fair enough. I did a little more digging and it seems you can dynamically link rust binaries too now: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/422
In Alpine Linux: Proposal to move Rust to mainShowing the 15 most recent of 19 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.