-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 127
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make no_std
into an optional feature on protocols
crates
#932
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Bencher
Click to view all benchmark results
Bencher - Continuous Benchmarking View Public Perf Page Docs | Repo | Chat | Help |
Bencher
Click to view all benchmark results
Bencher - Continuous Benchmarking View Public Perf Page Docs | Repo | Chat | Help |
Bencher
🚨 2 ALERTS: Threshold Boundary Limits exceeded!
Click to view all benchmark results
Bencher - Continuous Benchmarking View Public Perf Page Docs | Repo | Chat | Help |
Bencher
🚨 9 ALERTS: Threshold Boundary Limits exceeded!
Click to view all benchmark results
Bencher - Continuous Benchmarking View Public Perf Page Docs | Repo | Chat | Help |
plebhash
changed the title
make May 25, 2024
no_std
as an optional feature on protocols
cratesno_std
into an optional feature on protocols
crates
plebhash
force-pushed
the
feat-optional-no-std
branch
from
June 6, 2024 23:37
bfec4ff
to
dc98ab3
Compare
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
I'm trying to unblock #985 (comment) and it seems that this (amongst other reasons) is a blocker there. regardless of |
plebhash
force-pushed
the
feat-optional-no-std
branch
from
August 9, 2024 00:44
dc98ab3
to
f7ef878
Compare
rrybarczyk
approved these changes
Aug 9, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Many of the low level libs under
protocols
areno_std
. That is great, since it allows for potential firmware integrations usingrust-embedded
and targets without MMUs (e.g.: Xtensa ESP32, ARM Cortex-M, etc).Some projects in the community even have some potential to leverage SRI
protocols
crates for firmware integration, e.g.: https://github.com/bitaxeorg/esp-miner-rsHowever, for most common deployment scenarios (e.g.: x86-64), high level application code (e.g.:
roles
) has no hard requirement forno_std
. Also, having it as a mandatory feature becomes a blocker to many desirable changes.