Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby with Tom Richards
by blacksmoke16 on Sunday March 10, 2024 @12:13PM
(#39660287)
Keep in mind a good portion of the compile times for an application is dependent on what the code is doing and your hardware. I.e. just because Lucky is slow in this regard doesn't mean every project/framework is going to be just as bad. E.g. I can compile a dev build of the compiler in 20s.
Also I don't personally use an LSP, but the VSCode extension recently was re-written: https://forum.crystal-lang.org/t/crystal-vscode-extension-v0.... So may be worth checking out again. Or just don't use an LSP ;)
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby with Tom Richards
by fredrikholm on Sunday March 10, 2024 @02:20PM
(#39661263)
Cheers, all valid points! :)
With regards for compile times, I'm spoiled by languages that have sub-second compile times to the point where I actively lean on the compiler while I'm writing (see next point).
With regards to LSPs, I'm spoiled by the 1990s and can't live without auto-completion and suggestions. Why write something in 26 keystrokes when 4 will do ;)
Compile times and tooling are compared to the competition, sorely lacking. Auto complete, suggestions, documentation-on-hover etc are so slow that they're essentially useless.
For example, adding a simple model with two fields in an empty Lucky project (Rails, but Crystal) makes all my CPU fans spin at 100% capacity for ~35 seconds. Lucky has hot reload built in, but compiling those 6 lines take longer than cloning, compiling and running $FORMER_DAYJOB's ~800k lines of Go code base.