It makes sense as a porting tool, if you need to port the Rust compiler to some target that has a C compiler.
replyBut it doesn't mean rustc generates code for that target, only that you can run it there. You'd still have to teach LLVM about the target. Although that might already have been done.
It's not that useful for retro computers because the Rust compiler needs too much memory for most machines of the 32-bit era.
As far as I know, ISO c++ is no better than microsoft rust.
replyIt is said microsoft rust syntax is on the same brain damage complexity level than ISO c++. That, and I don't even talk about the technical cost of its runtime (not far from the toxicity of a jvm?)
What is Microsoft rust? I’ve never heard of such a thing. Or did I miss the joke?
replyI don't think there's a joke, this commenter seems to believe Rust is controlled by Microsoft
replyDon't think I am alone to know that...
reply