Move explorer out of toolchain git repository

Pull request

Table of contents

Abstract

The explorer codebase is no longer actively developed or maintained, but retains value as a place to look for implementations of various parts of the design. Having both the explorer and toolchain in the working git repository causes confusion for developers and users, and increases our incremental maintenance burden. We will move explorer out of the working git repository so that it remains accessible but is clearly deliniated from the toolchain and is more clearly frozen or archived.

Problem

Users have expressed confusion when they come across examples or tests for the explorer that involve Main(), whereas the design and implementation of the toolchain have moved on to Run() as the entry point.

Developers have attempted to update the explorer codebase to fix style guide issues1, as tools like grep or clang-tidy do not differentiate our active toolchain codebase from the frozen explorer one.

As we update Bazel, Clang, Clang-tidy, etc, we also have to update the explorer codebase to keep it building cleanly.

As we modify the //testing harness, we have to accommodate and work around the explorer tests234.

Background

Proposal

  1. Add a tag explorer-archived in the main carbon-lang git repository.
  2. Create a new explorer repository under the carbon-language organization that only contains the //explorer and //installers directories and their dependencies at head.
  3. Locally ensure the explorer tests build and pass under the explorer repository.
  4. Add a README.md to the explorer repository that explains explorer is archived and not under active development.
  5. Stop building, or remove the “Explorer (trunk)” compiler option from carbon.compiler-explorer.com.
  6. Delete //explorer and //installers in the main carbon-lang repository.
  7. Archive the explorer repository in GitHub, making it read-only.

Note that fuzzer test cases from the explorer are already relocated under //toolchain/*/fuzzer_corpus/.

Rationale

The primary purpose of the explorer codebase at this time is as a demonstration of past work implementing the carbon language design. This can help to inform the implementation of the toolchain as it catches up in various areas, as long as the design has not deviated from the explorer implementation.

Searching in, and providing links to the explorer codebase comes up in design discussions occasionally 5678910, and we should maintain the ability of toolchain developers to look through the explorer easily. The primary place they do so is on GitHub, where the code can be linked to. GitHub search only works on the main branch of a repository, so the trunk branch for the carbon-lang repository. To maintain searchability, the explorer codebase must either remain on trunk in carbon-lang or in a sibling repository. GitHub search does continue to work in archived repositories.

Proposal p3532 directed to keep the explorer codebase active in the main repository, with its tests building and running:

We should keep the Explorer’s code in place, building, and passing its basic regression tests because the built artifacts of the Explorer remain really valuable given its coverage of our design’s feature sets.

However the problems discussed above result from this situation. We can gain the benefit of access to the codebase while reducing its impact on developers and users by moving it into a separate git repository.

Alternatives considered

Use a branch to refer to the explorer codebase

We could create a branch in the carbon-lang repository that contains explorer, but delete it from trunk. This would also allow the code to be found and linked to, however GitHub search does not support searching in a branch. The main purpose of the explorer code while archived is for reading the implementation, and search is an important part of that.

Do nothing

In the future, we may want to restart development of the explorer codebase. At that time we would benefit from keeping the codebase building as we upgrade Bazel, Clang, Clang-tidy, etc. However we don’t currently have the resources to build two implementations of the language, and there’s no plan in our roadmaps to restart explorer development. So the cost of letting the explorer codebase become stale is outweighed by the costs of keeping it active.

  1. https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/pull/5224 ↩

  2. https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/pull/4979 ↩

  3. https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/pull/5025 ↩

  4. https://github.com/carbon-language/carbon-lang/pull/5036 ↩

  5. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/998959756045713438/1225116234199203860 ↩

  6. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/998959756045713438/1237143981150830673 ↩

  7. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/709488742942900284/1250577021474443376 ↩

  8. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/748959784815951963/1255669935439482993 ↩

  9. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/655578254970716160/1302033729761443963 ↩

  10. https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/941071822756143115/1349523309682753606 ↩