3 ms·

He probably tried to do dbg!(foo), which takes foo by ownership and consumes it. Doing dbg!(&foo) will accomplish the same thing (printing foo along with the li

by db48x 5y ago

He probably tried to do dbg!(foo), which takes foo by ownership and consumes it. Doing dbg!(&foo) will accomplish the same thing (printing foo along with the line number and file name), but because it only uses a reference to the foo, it won’t consume the original. This is perfectly sound and logical once you know the explanation, but it is pretty weird to a newcomer.

benreesman 5y ago
The project was alacrity and my checkout is on a laptop I don’t have on hand at the moment so unfortunately I can’t gist my patch, but I’ll have that box tomorrow and I’ll try to remember to do so. I was attempting to use whatever all their other logging was using. ‘&’ was the first thing I tried because I’ve done the tutorials and then some, but after that got the borrow checker arguing about my new line of code as well as two others I didn’t touch, I rotated through all the other sigils brute force, IIRC it was a combination of commenting out another line and ‘’ that got me a log line. Now maybe that’s on alacrity because maybe they do ownership in a weird way. But even in Haskell, even as a novice on stackoverflow, ‘unsafePerformIO’ will get you a line printed to STDERR, and it’s not 50-80s to build 50-ish kloc every time. I like learning programming languages, I like working on compilers, this stuff is basically my only hobby. But as the TF2 people are learning the hard way, if a complete novice can’t get a log line in without understanding a bunch of novel context, PyTorch is taking your SO out to dinner pretty soon. Now if Rust could build a million lines of code in 1-5s like it should be able to (and like it seems that e.g. Jai can) I wouldn’t care. I needed to get stuff done in C++ bad enough that I learned template metaprogramming, which I wouldn’t wish on an enemy. If Rust made my builds 50-100x faster in low optimization settings, I’d write it on clay tablets. But what I actually get is a comparably slow build, a comparably “!$&@>>>>”-heavy syntax, yet another failure to do macros that impress a Lisper in a curly brace language, and now the static analyzer’s usually good advice is mandatory and can’t be turned off to do a quick experiment. I always have to watch my cynicism because I’m a bit autistic and I offend way more often than I mean to, but if I’ve got 1MM lines of C++, I’ve got a pain in the ass on my hands. If I start porting any meaningful part of that over to Rust, now I’ve got two giant pains in the ass.
- paavohtl 5y ago
  Initial builds are indeed quite slow, especially when a project has a lot of dependencies. However, in most cases further builds are not that bad. I have never built Alacritty from source so I don't really know if there are any specific issues with it, but from my experience incremental builds take just a few seconds in medium sized projects. Additionally during development a full build is usually not necessary all the time; oftentimes it's just enough to check the code for errors with `cargo check`, which is usually significantly quicker than building a full debug binary. Edit: I tested building Alacritty from source on my computer (Ryzen 5600X, Windows 10). The initial build (consisting of 130 crates) took 34 seconds. Building again after adding a single print statement took 6 seconds, and `cargo check` took about half at 3 seconds. It's not ideal by any means, but IMO it's not also unreasonable for 25K lines of code, plus those ~130 dependencies.

by db48x 5y ago

benreesman 5y ago

The project was alacrity and my checkout is on a laptop I don’t have on hand at the moment so unfortunately I can’t gist my patch, but I’ll have that box tomorrow and I’ll try to remember to do so. I was attempting to use whatever all their other logging was using. ‘&’ was the first thing I tried because I’ve done the tutorials and then some, but after that got the borrow checker arguing about my new line of code as well as two others I didn’t touch, I rotated through all the other sigils brute force, IIRC it was a combination of commenting out another line and ‘’ that got me a log line. Now maybe that’s on alacrity because maybe they do ownership in a weird way. But even in Haskell, even as a novice on stackoverflow, ‘unsafePerformIO’ will get you a line printed to STDERR, and it’s not 50-80s to build 50-ish kloc every time. I like learning programming languages, I like working on compilers, this stuff is basically my only hobby. But as the TF2 people are learning the hard way, if a complete novice can’t get a log line in without understanding a bunch of novel context, PyTorch is taking your SO out to dinner pretty soon. Now if Rust could build a million lines of code in 1-5s like it should be able to (and like it seems that e.g. Jai can) I wouldn’t care. I needed to get stuff done in C++ bad enough that I learned template metaprogramming, which I wouldn’t wish on an enemy. If Rust made my builds 50-100x faster in low optimization settings, I’d write it on clay tablets. But what I actually get is a comparably slow build, a comparably “!$&@>>>>”-heavy syntax, yet another failure to do macros that impress a Lisper in a curly brace language, and now the static analyzer’s usually good advice is mandatory and can’t be turned off to do a quick experiment. I always have to watch my cynicism because I’m a bit autistic and I offend way more often than I mean to, but if I’ve got 1MM lines of C++, I’ve got a pain in the ass on my hands. If I start porting any meaningful part of that over to Rust, now I’ve got two giant pains in the ass.

paavohtl 5y ago
Initial builds are indeed quite slow, especially when a project has a lot of dependencies. However, in most cases further builds are not that bad. I have never built Alacritty from source so I don't really know if there are any specific issues with it, but from my experience incremental builds take just a few seconds in medium sized projects. Additionally during development a full build is usually not necessary all the time; oftentimes it's just enough to check the code for errors with `cargo check`, which is usually significantly quicker than building a full debug binary. Edit: I tested building Alacritty from source on my computer (Ryzen 5600X, Windows 10). The initial build (consisting of 130 crates) took 34 seconds. Building again after adding a single print statement took 6 seconds, and `cargo check` took about half at 3 seconds. It's not ideal by any means, but IMO it's not also unreasonable for 25K lines of code, plus those ~130 dependencies.