5 comments

  • quux1 hour ago
    Ladybird has been really shaping up over the last month or so, I pull and build the latest bits every morning and use it for low stakes web browsing (HN, news sites, reddit, youtube, blogs, etc.) and it&#x27;s getting very close to the point where I forget that it&#x27;s a pre-alpha.<p>Very exciting to watch a completely new browser&#x2F;browser engine come together. Reminds me of the early days of Mozilla and Gecko<p>Posted with Ladybird :)
  • moron4hire3 minutes ago
    Would love to see where all the folks from 5 years ago, breathlessly declaring it&#x27;s futile to start a new browser project, are now and what they are doing with their lives.
  • CitrusFruits1 hour ago
    Ladybird is such an exciting project, really excited to try it out for day to day browsing when they get into Alpha.
    • quux1 hour ago
      It&#x27;s very easy to build it yourself if you want to try it right now.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;LadybirdBrowser&#x2F;ladybird&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;Documentation&#x2F;BuildInstructionsLadybird.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;LadybirdBrowser&#x2F;ladybird&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;Docu...</a>
  • mempko1 hour ago
    Honest question for people. I&#x27;m a C++ dev and I&#x27;m seeing a lot of moves to rust. Everyone is using agents to move stuff to rust and I tried it myself. The amount of insane hardrive space usage (over 90GB of build artifacts that constantly need cleanup) is that normal? What am I doing wrong. Are people seeing advantages after a move to rust that wasn&#x27;t there in C++ (assuming no new features). Like is your project better after moving to rust in obvious ways?
    • pornel48 minutes ago
      It&#x27;s expected. Cargo has very conservative cache cleanup (once per month IIRC).<p>There&#x27;s incremental compilation cache that generates lots of churn (although Rust&#x27;s compilation unit is a crate, &quot;queries&quot; in the compiler are cached individually, creating many cache entries per function per type).<p>The other half of the disk space is debug info, because abstractions that optimize down to zero runtime code still carry all of their source-level debug info.<p>These can be adjusted in build profiles if you&#x27;re ok with coarser debug info or less fine-grained caching.
      • afdbcreid34 minutes ago
        Cargo has no cache cleanup for `target` on stable.
    • andoowhy47 minutes ago
      It&#x27;s normal, but they&#x27;re working on it:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.rust-lang.org&#x2F;inside-rust&#x2F;2026&#x2F;08&#x2F;18&#x2F;reducing-target-dir-size-on-nightly&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.rust-lang.org&#x2F;inside-rust&#x2F;2026&#x2F;08&#x2F;18&#x2F;reducing-t...</a>
    • slopinthebag1 hour ago
      90gb? i&#x27;ve ran cargo clean on a single project and reclaimed over 700gb before.<p>but i still love rust ofc
      • ASalazarMX1 hour ago
        Jesus, that makes the JavaScript ecosystem look moderate by comparison!
    • ranger_danger23 minutes ago
      Isn&#x27;t the advantage memory safety?<p>When I mentioned, after C++26 failed its vote, that maybe they should use this extra time to focus more on memory safety, I got downvoted instead.<p>Surely that attitude isn&#x27;t helping their situation.
    • marsven_4221 hour ago
      [dead]
  • pmkary1 hour ago
    [flagged]