Why not lz4? It's faster than snappy. On Nov 29, 2013 11:29 AM, "Patrick Walton" <pcwal...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/13 10:26 AM, comex wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Daniel Micay <danielmi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> A minimal program definitely doesn't compile more slowly than `clang`: >>> >> >> Well, I said it was mostly unrelated. :) >> >> Importing the std crate is responsible for the overhead, but if the C >> program can bring in basic library functions in the time it takes Rust >> to bring in nothing, it's still faster. >> >> ...but according to Instruments, almost 70% of the compilation time >> for an empty non-#[no_std] crate is being spent inside >> flate::inflate_bytes (93ms). If that's accurate, it doesn't sound too >> hard to fix, if it matters to anyone. Compilation time for more >> substantial crates is more interesting, of course, but I do like the >> instantaneous feeling of compiling small C utilities. >> > > Yeah, we need to rework the representation of metadata. I'd also like to > try switching to Snappy at some point (or just not compressing). > > Patrick > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > Rust-dev@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
