Rust

5751 readers

27 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

[email protected]

Credits

The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Published my first rust program to the AUR (aur.archlinux.org)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

This comment would be much better if it featured an explanation of your concerns with that particular opt setting.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

There is no deep explanation or anything.

Release profile defaults to -O3. -Oz compromises runtime performance for binary size.

When you start seeing for example network services which are not going to be running in constrained environments, nor do they restrict themselves from using heap allocations and all, when you see them set -Oz in their release profiles. Then you start to see small beginner projects setting it like OP here. You start to wonder if it's a pattern, and the settings are being copied from somewhere else, with potential misconceptions like thinking it can meaningfully reduce runtime memory usage or something.

I actually think I found the culprit, thanks to one of the projects I was hinting at mentioning it:

https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust

Looks like we have a second wave of net-negative common wisdom in the ecosystem, the first being optimizing for dependencies' compile times. But this one is not nearly as bad, as it doesn't affect libraries.