(2) There’s no high-profile language design decision you can point to and say “aha, that was a mistake!” No header files, for example. The slowness comes from a lot of smaller things that have real benefits, such as the borrow check.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How about a secure distribured compiler cache?
-
Could define secure? What are the requirements here?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
What % of the total compilation time is due to the checks? Maybe a quick no-check compilation mode would be beneficial for quick edits? Programming has a rhythm where big changes are followed by many smaller ones. A no-check compilation may be useful for the small changes.
-
Seems you'd always want no-check when building as a user rather than a developer unless you distrust upstream...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@nnethercote's work would tend to contradict this. -
I would say that 3 years ago it wasn't well optimized, and finding improvements was really easy. Today it's much harder. So I think "pretty well optimized" is a reasonable description.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
What about memorization and parallelism?
-
Rustc already does both of those to some degree
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
LLVM? Has anyone seen an LLVM-based compiler these days that wasn't slow?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.