-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 330
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Section on rust-analyzer should recommend enabling seperate cargo directories #1380
Comments
If it is mentioned it should also be made very clear that it will use even more memory since it duplicated the target directory. People already complain that the target is too big when using bevy and this won't help with that. |
I'm not sure I understand what is being discussed here: are you recommending that you set the path to the I agree with IceSentry that this may cause a lot of extra files, especially since that you're far less likely to run |
Alright, I'm fine to leave this out. |
To be clear, I 100% think this should be recommended. I use it all the time and it's extremely useful. I just think it should be accompanied by a warning that it uses a lot more space. @BD103 the rust-analyzer target folder is embedded in the base target folder so running cargo clean will also clean it. That part is not a concern. cargo-sweep doesn't pick it up, but it's not an official project anyway. |
Ok, that makes sense as long as the proper warnings are kept. This shouldn't be conveyed as costless. |
This is a huge QoL / iteration speed improvement. It should be mentioned right after we talk about
rust-analyzer
. Call out both the pros and cons.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: