<html dir="ltr"><head></head><body style="text-align:left; direction:ltr;"><div>Indeed, this is exactly what I was thinking. From an engineering maintenance perspective, even if you managed to get something "working", the result would be an incomprehensible mess. I don't usually like to speak in such extremes, and I certainly don't mean any offense, but in this case it's warranted: this is a pretty bad idea.</div><div><br></div><div>On Tue, 2020-08-04 at 14:08 -0400, Mike Nice wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:2px #729fcf solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>On 8/4/2020 7:21 AM, pangoSE wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:2px #729fcf solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>I suggest we wait for ruffle to be ready and then compile P2 to first wasm and then decompile it into C and then translate it into rust.</div><div>It can then be cleaned up and shipped to both as a desktop application and a wasm binary run in the browser.</div></blockquote><div>ruffle -> wasm -> C -> rust is unlikely to be useful. Sure it might </div><div>run, but all program comments will have been stripped. The automatic C </div><div>-> Rust step is likely to generate unsafe mode code that must be cleaned </div><div>up to fully see the benefits of Rust. And finally, the result would </div><div>not be maintainable over the long term without a huge amount of cleanup.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>_______________________________________________</div><div>talk mailing list</div><div><a href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org">talk@openstreetmap.org</a></div><div><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a></div></blockquote></body></html>