3 ms·
How would it not help? Someone might see this and realize that Rust is a viable game dev option and adopt it for their next game. In my experience, Rust is rel
by adamnemecek 6y ago
How would it not help? Someone might see this and realize that Rust is a viable game dev option and adopt it for their next game.
In my experience, Rust is relatively fast on recompilation, possibly faster than C++.
Rust is a much younger language so you have to wait.
- pjmlp 6y agoRust build times are definitly slower than C++ ones, specially when compared against Windows compilers. However I do conceed that some of it comes down to workflow and out of the box experience (no customizations). In C++ the only code I compile from source is my own, all third party dependencies are available as binaries. Then not only do I do incremental compilation, Visual C++ also does incremental linking, and I do take the effort of using external templates for common types. And modules are just aroud the corner. C++ Builder also is quite fast, due to its Delphi like extensions, it offers a fast compilation mode for debugging workflows. So while the compilation time for my Gtk-rs toy app has improved quite a lot during the last 3 years, the Gtkmm version of it still builds in a fraction of the time.
- badsectoracula 6y agoAnyone who has enough knowledge to build a game engine like rg3d also has enough knowledge to be able to judge if Rust is capable of building an engine like rg3d even if they haven't built an engine in Rust themselves. If after reading abour Rust a programmer cannot figure out if Rust can be used to make a game engine then that programmer is incapable of making a game engine in the first place so in the grand scheme of things this chances nothing.
- adamnemecek 6y agoOK they do, so what.