@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #75804 has been requested for prioritization.
I’d suggest to nominate this one to raise awareness
I don’t think we have any other actionable items
isn't this tracked by perf already?
it isn't, see discussion in #t-compiler/performance > Regression in helloworld binary size for each release
it's long been desired for perf.rlo to track this, just not something we've done yet. shouldn't really even be all that hard to add -- just needs some design and thought.
IMO I don't think nominating would help much, the only thing to say is "let's track this in perf"
well, I guess it should be given a priority at least
but the measurement was taken without much precision, not even
panic = "abort", so I think P-low
RUST_DBG_FLAGS='-C debuginfo=1 -C panic=abort -C opt-level=0' RUST_REL_FLAGS='-C debuginfo=0 -C panic=abort -C opt-level=3'
@Joshua Nelson :point_up: it has used
panic=abort or am I wrong?
oh I missed that, sorry
shouldn't we ping cleanup to at least search for the commit that made this huge regression between beta and nightly?
well if it's just one, maybe there is more than one
unsure what prioritity should we give to this one
bump, this is pending ...
P-medium seems fine
I mean, it’s a long-standing issue that’s never been caught before and it’s only a hello world
To me the real question is: does this issue affect more complex programs?
Issue #75804's prioritization request has been removed.