4 ms·
Blog author here. I'm an Intel i7-8700k desktop. A few years old at this point, but quite beefy. Maybe this is a Windows issue? If I run "zig build" and then i
by forrestthewoods 5y ago
Blog author here. I'm an Intel i7-8700k desktop. A few years old at this point, but quite beefy.
Maybe this is a Windows issue? If I run "zig build" and then immediately run "zig build" again it still takes 3 seconds.
- llimllib 5y agoTotally possible! I don't have a Windows box to test on, and win does sometimes end up as a second class citizen for stuff like this.
- mst 5y agoA relatively quick way to test that theory might be to pull down a WSL2 image of some sort and run the same thing in there. Speaking as somebody who mostly codes for *n?x but has some windows users of their libraries, I've run face first into "everything I know about build optimisation is inapplicable on windows" more than once. ('everything' is admittedly slightly hyperbolic but I'm sufficiently bad at windows tooling that it always feels that way)
- defen 5y agoSounds like something is messed up with your zig cache. I have a medium-size project (30 files, 10s of thousands of lines of code) that takes 0.07 seconds to `zig build` if nothing has changed. This is on a Mac.
- forrestthewoods 5y agoHow do I clean the zig cache? There does not appear to be a "zig clean".
- anonymoushn 5y agorm -rf zig-cache over here
- forrestthewoods 5y agoAh didn't realize it was just a folder in the project directory, oops! Nuked zig-cache and zig-out, rebuild, no change in build times.