News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by vvanders on Tuesday September 26, 2017 @06:53PM (#15343324)
> Trend wise, applications are expanding more and more into controlling its whole life-cycle from binary to deployment. Repeatable build Containers VM Unikernels Standardized libraries

Maybe in the cloud, however that's only a portion of where you see C++ deployed. For embedded systems(where C & Rust are the only other options) I don't see it going this way anytime soon.

Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by jsolson on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @01:56AM (#15345234)
Aren't embedded systems already there? What is a firmware blob if not a monolithic static build artifact? Bazel is perfect for this. I recently taught it how to build boot images for Xilinx FPGAs including a bitstream, first stage bootloader, kernel, and initial ramdisk, all hermetically built and bottled up into a boot.bin. I can reproduce my firmware from source control and get out the same bits. How neat is that?
Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by 0xbear on Thursday September 28, 2017 @07:33PM (#15361643)
Speaking of which, any possibility of open sourcing this? We are looking to get into FPGAs and would rather not reinvent a bicycle.
Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by jsolson on Saturday September 30, 2017 @01:54PM (#15374080)
Yes.

It's a little complicated as I did it for a personal project, but I'm also pulling it into Google for my 20% project. It is by FAR easier/faster for me to release under Google's copyright, but there's a bit of "paperwork" I need to go through to get it staged and approved for the Google GitHub.

Since it seems there's interest I'll take a stab at that on Monday. It usually takes a week or two, but no promises. I don't anticipate any blocking issues, though, as the bazel bits don't expose anything about Google.

One caveat -- as released it won't quite be bitwise hermetic, as it depends on an external Xilinx toolchain, and Xilinx does non-hermetic things to their bits that are awkward to work around (you can, but my code to do that is a much less mature shell script full of dd and cat commands to rip apart bitstreams and glue them back together -- I've since found open source tooling for accomplishing the same task, but haven't adopted it yet).

Drop me an email (addr in profile) and I'll tell you when it's up.

Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by jopsen on Tuesday September 26, 2017 @11:40PM (#15344745)
Repeatable builds are pretty universally desirable, why wouldn't you want it for embedded systems?

It seems pretty important for security, etc..

Note: Rust and cargo.lock files another example of things going in this direction.

Re:Abseil: C++ Common Libraries by pjmlp on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @02:37AM (#15345387)
> where C & Rust are the only other options

Java, Ada, Pascal, Basic also happen to be viable options, with compiler vendors still doing quite well.