(github.com)

383 points hkalbasi | 1 comments | 24 Jan 25 16:25 UTC | HN request time: 0.218s | source

Show context

throwaway106382 ◴[24 Jan 25 16:43 UTC] No.42814864[source]▶

> Mold is already very fast, however it doesn't do incremental linking and the author has stated that they don't intend to. Wild doesn't do incremental linking yet, but that is the end-goal. By writing Wild in Rust, it's hoped that the complexity of incremental linking will be achievable.

Can someone explain what is so special about Rust for this?

replies(11): >>42814916 #>>42814925 #>>42814952 #>>42814958 #>>42814975 #>>42815031 #>>42815056 #>>42815091 #>>42815564 #>>42816061 #>>42816644 #

1. manoweb ◴[24 Jan 25 16:59 UTC] No.42815056[source]▶

>>42814864 #

That is baffling. Maybe the author assumes that a language with many safeguards will lead to keeping complexity under control for a difficult task.

By the way I had to lookup what incremental linking is, in practice I think it means that code from libraries and modules that have not changed won’t need to be re-packed each time which ch will save time for frequent development builds, it’s actually ingenious

↑

Wild – A fast linker for Linux