Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by steveklabnik 3696 days ago
In general, we are very interested in reproducible builds, and have fixed bugs where accidental non-determinism has crept in. However, it can be easy to reintroduce with build.rs, which allows for executing arbitrary Rust code before a build. Syntax extensions are another problem here. But the scope is much reduced, it's true.
1 comments
conradev 3696 days ago
That's awesome to hear. Would it be possible to make an attribute like

#[deny(non_deterministic)]

which would error if `build.rs` or similar is present? Also, for usage of things like the `file!` macro, which might mess up determinism based on the build directory.

Theoretically, syntax extensions could be written to be deterministic as well (for a given version, of course).

Is there a tracking issue on this currently?

link
steveklabnik 3696 days ago
There isn't, it might be an interesting idea! Not allowing build.rs would eliminate a lot of crates, and not all build.rs' are nondeterministic... So that's tough.
link
conradev 3696 days ago
Yeah. Perhaps developers could attribute functions in `build.rs` specifically with "deterministic", so you could see what in the dependency graph isn't deterministic.

Unfortunately, unlike with borrowck, reproducibility is inherently hard to verify, and you'd have to do it manually with a VM or some different build environment.

This is interesting: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/33296

link