←back to thread

Why is the Rust compiler so slow?

(sharnoff.io)
302 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | 26 Jun 25 19:29 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
adastra22 ◴[26 Jun 25 20:10 UTC] No.44390813[source]▶
As a former C++ developer, claims that rust compilation is slow leave me scratching my head.
replies(5): >>44390867 #>>44390918 #>>44391177 #>>44395299 #>>44403069 #
eikenberry ◴[26 Jun 25 20:22 UTC] No.44390918[source]▶
Which is one of the reasons why Rust is considered to be targeting C++'s developers. C++ devs already have the Stockholm syndrome needed to tolerate the tooling.
replies(3): >>44391267 #>>44391775 #>>44392740 #
MyOutfitIsVague ◴[26 Jun 25 20:56 UTC] No.44391267[source]▶
Rust's compilation is slow, but the tooling is just about the best that any programming language has.
replies(2): >>44392557 #>>44394703 #
GuB-42 ◴[26 Jun 25 23:45 UTC] No.44392557[source]▶
How good is the debugger? "edit and continue"? Hot reload? Full IDE?

I don't know enough Rust, but I find these aspects are seriously lacking in C++ on Linux, and it is one of the few things I think Windows has it better for developers. Is Rust better?

replies(3): >>44392771 #>>44393092 #>>44393361 #
adastra22 ◴[27 Jun 25 00:26 UTC] No.44392771[source]▶
No idea because I never do that. Nor does any rust programmer I know. Which may answer your question ;)
replies(2): >>44398467 #>>44401430 #
1. frollogaston ◴[27 Jun 25 17:10 UTC] No.44398467[source]▶
"Rust devs don't use debuggers" isn't a good answer. The one time I used Rust for some project like 7 years ago, I did have to use a debugger, and it was fine.