I experimented with LZ4. https://github.com/mozilla/rust/pull/6954. It isn't worth it, IMO.
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Carter Charbonneau <[email protected]> wrote: > Why not lz4? It's faster than snappy. > > On Nov 29, 2013 11:29 AM, "Patrick Walton" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 11/29/13 10:26 AM, comex wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Daniel Micay <[email protected]> >>> 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 >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
