> ...with the emphasis on limp. At some points, we are using over 100 GB of RAM... not ideal.
(so performance will be the next thing to be worked on to make this useable).
I think the goals of using gcc for rust is that it can provide a parallel implementation, which can help uncover bugs and provide more stability to the entire language, and because if there is a large gcc project already, they may be reticent to introduce LLVM as a dependency as well.
That is a $200 word right there, and you're using it wrong.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/can-reticent-mean-re...
You're correct that some people recommend against it, and it's only been in use since the second world war.
Languages mutate quickly.
More on prescriptive vs descriptive: https://twominenglish.com/prescriptivist-vs-descriptivist/
I personally am more descriptivist when it comes to English. It is also a lot of fun to bring some M-W citations in order to "Well, actually" someone who is "Well, actually"-ing.
This GCC support here is only a backend in the existing Rust compiler written in Rust. The existing Rust compiler is using GCC as a language-agnostic assembler and optimizer, not as a Rust compiler. The GCC part doesn't even know what Rust code looks like.
There is a different project meant to reimplement Rust (front end) from scratch in C++ in GCC itself, but that implementation is far behind and can't compile non-toy programs yet.