[byroot]

> you wouldn't use ruby outside of Linux, Windows, Mac, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Rust has support for more than that[1].

Ruby has support for plenty of "exotic" systems like HP UX, AIX etc. It's unclear how many people actually use it, but it's there.

> I don't know if they want to use an existing JIT codegen like LLVM or Cranelift, or their own.

Their own.

[petercooper]

Fun bit of trivia.. Ruby only (officially) dropped Atari ST support in 2016: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/c5eb24349a4535948514fe765c... .. I've never heard of anyone actually using Ruby on an Atari ST though(!)

[megumax]

I wasn't even referring to CRuby, I was referring to YJIT especially. For now, it only works on x86_64 Unix like systems (Linux and mac). I doubt that someone will ever port YJIT codegen to these "esoteric" architectures, so rust platform support is enough.

[byroot]

> I wasn't even referring to CRuby, I was referring to YJIT especially.

My bad, that's really not what I understood from your initial statement. But yes agreed.

The only real downside is discussed on the ticket. Ruby is primarily installed from source, so requiring a second toolchain is not ideal.

[pjmlp]

While those that were willing to make it happen, now have to wait until Rust/Zig supports their esoteric architecture.

[pjmlp]

At least in what concerns AIX, IBM has migrated their compilers on top of LLVM, so some support is there.

No idea about HP-UX, it is impossible to find anything now, apparently HPE has buried almost everything about it. Completely unrelated to how good it used to be about 20 years ago.

[byroot]

I just gave a couple examples I had in mind because they came up recently. The point was that the parent's assertion:

> you wouldn't use ruby outside of Linux, Windows, Mac, FreeBSD, OpenBSD

Isn't quite true.

[pjmlp]

Agreed.