Comment by MangoToupe
1 day ago
I don't really consider it to be slow at all. It seems about as performant as any other language this complexity, and it's far faster than the 15 minute C++ and Scala build times I'd place in the same category.
1 day ago
I don't really consider it to be slow at all. It seems about as performant as any other language this complexity, and it's far faster than the 15 minute C++ and Scala build times I'd place in the same category.
I also don’t understand this, the rust compiler hardly bothers me at all when I’m working. I feel like this is due to how bad it was early on and people just sticking to that narrative
The memory usage is quite large compared to C/C++ when compiling. I use Virtual Machines for Demos on my YouTube Channel and compiling something large in Rust requires 8GB+.
In C/C++ I don't even have to worry about it.
I can't agree, I've had C/C++ builds of well known open source projects try to use >100GB of memory...
Maybe something else is going on then. I've done builds of some large open source projects and most of the time they was maxing the cores (I was building j32) but memory usage was fine.
Out of interest what were they?
1 reply →
I can't say the same. Telling people to use `-j$(nproc)` in lieu of `-j` to avoid the wrath of the OOM-killer is a rite of passage
When C++ templates are turing complete is it pointless to complain about the compile times without considering the actual code :)