mold VS clap-rs

I think this is unlikely to gain traction. I say that no to discourage you, just to explain.

- The community has an instinctive distrust of closed source or a compiler from an untrusted source. If you’re familiar with the Trusting Trust attack you’ll understand why.

- Dev tools in every language ecosystem are almost always free, unless they involve some kind of hosting. People aren’t used to opening their wallets. Look the experience of the guy who built the mold linker(https://github.com/rui314/mold). Far superior to the state of art, improves incremental compiles a lot, widely applicable across ecosystems (C, C++, Rust), CPU architectures and Operating Systems. You don’t even have to modify your compiler, just need to point to his linker. He’s even giving it away for free for personal use. But still, almost no one uses it. The inertia of the established options is really high.

- It’s not complex enough. Think about the complexity involved in the cranelift backend. No one can seriously recreate the efforts of bjorn3. If we could have, we would have. But the idea idea here can be recreated, especially by the experts who already built incremental compilation into rustc.

- But if your solution is truly complex, like the parallel frontend, the burden of maintaining a fork would be too high. You’d have to spend all your time rebasing.

Again I’m not trying to discourage you, just stating the difficulties of making a business in the dev tools space. You would be better off contributing this excellent work to the community and trying a different tack.

I initially thought this would be about the mold linker (https://github.com/rui314/mold)

I assume this submission is trying to highlight the specific message (2023-01-24) : https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/190#issuecomment-14028...

Fyi... the author wrote a more expansive blog post about selling dev tools a few months later (2023-06-06) and there was a related HN thread about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36225016

Loongson's LoongArch CPU has been supported. (03b1a1c)

I'm amazed at how quickly the author responds to requests: https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/1057

From the report to the fix in less than two days.

I'm not sure how competitive it will be with lld, especially if we consider ThinLTO (which takes multiple minutes on 64-core machine) - it can make the advantages of mold insignificant.

What other solutions have you tried for the problem of slow linking? You haven't even said which linker and what flags you're using. I haven't actually tried it, but the author of gold has an even faster linker called mold: https://github.com/rui314/mold

> Mold did it first, though: https://github.com/rui314/mold

Before LLD?

We will be using the library for Clap - A simple-to-use, efficient, and full-featured library for parsing command line arguments and subcommands.

I recently came across this question (and associated answer) on the clap repository. The answer given is a good one. But I wanted to expand with my own findings and practices, which spurred the motivation for this post.

We can also use tuple-like struct syntax and named-field struct syntax for enum variants within our enum; this is because unlike in other OOP languages, Rust enums are actually sum types. You can read more about how powerful Rust enums are in another article we wrote here. You can have optional arguments by simply wrapping the types in Option, but if you want to add a flag to a command you can use bool, since clap recognises that flags are either there or not there. Let's have a look at what this might look like:

I began by developing a wrapper for the CurseForge API, which turned out to be a lengthy and challenging process but constituted the bulk of the work. Next, I coded the CLI, which was relatively straightforward. Instead of using the clap crate, a Rust tool for generating CLIs, I opted for the following line of code:

By this time I had already gotten tired of parsing arguments by myself and had looked for something to help with that. I found a really dang good argument parsing library called clap. What makes it so cool is it's largely declarative for common uses. You simply mark up a struct with attributes, and the parser automatically generates the usage and all the argument parsing code.

How CLI arguments are handled (using clap).

Is this just referring to wrapping based on the terminal width? That is supported with the wrap_help feature though I have been considering making it a default feature.

CLI, use Clap. If you want to get fancy, use Tui.

As our CLI is getting more complex, we'll use the clap crate to parse the command line arguments.