On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Oren Ben-Kiki <o...@ben-kiki.org> wrote: > > That would be awesome, if it were true; it is quite a trick to pull that off > when the default methods are implemented in a different crate. Can someone > provide an authoritative answer on this? > > Also, C++ faces the problem of providing a single copy of monomorphised > functions (for templates). This is done during the link phase and AFAIK is > one of the causes of C++ links taking a painfully long time. Will Rust > suffer from the same problem?
Rust serializes any generic or inline functions to an AST stored in the crate metadata and will re-compile them as-needed per-crate. In both Rust and C++, you end up with one copy of these at runtime for each dynamically linked shared object. With C++ templates, the linker or link-time optimization discards duplicate instantiations across compilation units. Rust doesn't have compilation units smaller than a crate so there is no equivalent functionality. If you use crates as compilation units to make compiles incremental/parallel, the situation is much worse than C++ as you'll have many duplicates and they won't even go away with link-time optimization until `mergefunc` works. There's almost no point in doing anything but a massive crate at this point... _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
