Re: rust non-free-compatible trademark

[lkcl <luke.leighton@gmail.com>]

(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 <fweimer@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