Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Doom Renderer written in Rust

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 69 posts

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#2

Post by comex »

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#3

Post by ehsanu1 »

comex wrote: post #2

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

The core devs are sympathetic (what with Rust being self-hosted) and apparently incremental compilation is coming soon: https://github.com/rust-lang/meeting-minutes/blob/master/wee...

There is also a way to parallelize compilation, which might sometimes speed things up, it's just not enabled by default yet: http://discuss.rust-lang.org/t/default-settings-for-parallel...

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#4

Post by Skywing »

comex wrote: post #2

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

I remember a day where I was proud that my C projects took a few seconds to compile. Made me feel like I had written something with some umph to it.

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#5

Post by melling »

comex wrote: post #2

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

Turbo Pascal and Delphi had incredibly fast compilers. Why can't we make fast compilation a required feature today? We should never have to wait for the compiler/linker.

http://prog21.dadgum.com/47.html

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#6

Post by reubenmorais »

comex wrote: post #2

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

Have you profiled the build? Is most of it spent in the compiler?

A more practical point is that the main competitor is C++, a language notorious for long compilation times, so not-ultra-fast compile times might not be the highest priority for people working on rustc.

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#7

Post by bmh100 »

These are really valuable projects. It's not only a nostalgic project to hack on. It's also a learning tool for those interested in game programming, idiomatic Rust, and C-to-Rust conversion. Even building complex software from requirements. Thank you, Cristi Cobzarenco.

Re: A Doom Renderer written in Rust

#8

Post by smosher_ »

comex wrote: post #2

This is sort of off topic, but the fact that every change to the source requires (on my machine) 3-4 full seconds to recompile, without optimization, is indicative of the compiler performance problems that remain my main roadblock with Rust.

(Even more OT and not a criticism of you comment.)

I wish someone could send your comment back in time so I could have read it when Doom was first released. I think it took longer just to get the game started up back then.

Post reply on HN