Rust

6005 readers

4 users here now

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

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

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

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

EdTheLegendary@programming.dev

kahnclusions@programming.dev

torcherist@programming.dev

Speeding up the Rust edit-build-run cycle (davidlattimore.github.io)

submitted 4 days ago by copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de to c/rust@programming.dev

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

If you’re like many developers and you generally use println for debugging and rarely or never use an actual debugger, then this is wasted time.

I weep for the time lost on debugging with println. Good grief. It's like having access to a time stopping ability and going "nah, I like trying to add a marker and tracing footsteps".

Yes, for multi threaded workloads there aren't many options, but most are single threaded and eschewing a debugger is bonkers to me.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] BB_C@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

for multi threaded workloads there aren’t many options

Anyone who actually writes Rust code knows about tracing my friend.

We also have the ever useful #[track_caller]/Location::caller().

And it's needless to say that dbg!() also exists, which is better than manual printing for quick debugging.

So there exists a range of options setting between simple printing, and having to resort to using gdb/lldb (possibly with rr).

But yes, skipping debugging symbols was a bad suggestion.

load more comments (2 replies)