On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Gregory Szorc <g...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Would it help if we had a separate --enable-optimize-rust (or similar) > option to control Rust optimizations so we have separate knobs? If we did > that, --disable-optimize-rust could be opt-level 0 or 1 and > --enable-optimize-rust could be opt-level=2. The local defaults would > probably be --enable-optimize/--disable-optimize-rust (mirroring today).
Yeah, that would probably be more user friendly than the environment variable solution that we have today. Still it's hard to know what the correct defaults are. > I'm not sure if it is possible, but per-crate optimization levels might > help. Although, the data shows that the style crate is one of the slowest to > compile. And, this crate's optimization is also apparently very important > for accurate performance testing. That's a really unfortunate conflict to > have and it would be terrific if we could make the style crate compile > faster so this conflict goes away. I've filed bug 1412077 to track > improvements here. Hopefully the thinlto work that Alex is doing (https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/help-test-out-thinlto/6017) will make a difference here. -Jeff _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
