this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
62 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

5953 readers
16 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

very nice, now let's see that binary size.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Unless the binary size difference is insane, who would say "oh well we were going to pick the library that wasn't riddled with security issues but we decided to save 2MB instead, hope that makes you feel better about your $12m cybersecurity fine!".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There are only going to be edge-cases where the binary size will really cause headache. Individual projects probably won’t worry too much about a size difference if it’s less than 10-20MB.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

my whole career is those edge cases

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

I don’t doubt that some places care about a 1MB size difference. After all, some embedded systems with limited storage need every megabyte they can spare.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

yes, i know people that will pay 12m to save 2mb.

[–] Solemarc -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I can't be bothered to build them but looking at the releases on GitHub openssl 3.4.0 is 17.5mb and rustls is 2.6mb. both of these releases are source files not binaries but I don't see how rustls could possibly be larger than openssl.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago

Comparing source code sizes is completely meaningless. Rust projects are usually smaller with far more granular dependencies.