3 ms·

> My VC++ builds are still faster, because they can enjoy using binary libraries across projects, something that cargo doesn't yet support. This isn't anywhere

> My VC++ builds are still faster, because they can enjoy using binary libraries across projects, something that cargo doesn't yet support. This isn't anywhere near the top issue that I (or anyone else I know of) encounter with build performance in Rust. Dependent library builds are very parallelizable, so they tend to build quickly. Moreover, the build performance that matters in the day-to-day cycle is mostly rebuild performance, and the binary artifacts are cached in this case. We could spend time adding a global cache of build artifacts, I guess, but all the time we'd spend working on this wouldn't impact my development velocity much at all. Incremental compilation, on the other hand, would.

pjmlp 10y ago
Every time a new Rust release comes out, I try to update all the VSCode relevant plugins. It takes me more than one hour on a core duo with 8 GB + HDD, while I occasionally see the same crates being compiled and get to do something else. I could probably buy a new computer, as this one isn't something that one can easily parallelize, but why should I when my C++ builds are actually fast enough? I am just an opinated Rust dabbler, please take my complaint as contributing feedback about what I see as one possible show stopper for Windows developers to adopt Rust, vs our current .NET + C++ workflow, in terms of productivity. Thanks for Rust.