Easy to say "monomorphization is awful and Rust should never have done it", harder to say "I want all generic functions to be compiled to bytecode and to embed a Rust interpreter in every binary".
-
Show this thread
-
I'm increasingly convinced that the interpreter solution is the only reasonable alternative for Rust.
6 replies 1 retweet 15 likesShow this thread -
*I'm* actually OK with this as an opt-in compilation mode, at least for cold functions. But are the people complaining about compilation time OK with it?
7 replies 0 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @pcwalton
What about Swift witness tables as a kind of half-way? Also I would want interpreted only for newly-needed generic functions in an incremental compile and then my long-running compile process hot-swaps in monomorphized versions when they’re ready.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
We tried witness tables (intensional type analysis). It was a giant mess (I wrote a lot of that code). I suspect it wouldn’t be much faster at runtime than just having an interpreter, and an interpreter would be faster to compile.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.