this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
30 points (89.5% liked)

Rust

6785 readers
57 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] monogram 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

There’s a difference between a framework that builds to an exe and one that can develop in windows

[–] TehPers@beehaw.org 3 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I'll be honest, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say, but it sounds like cross-compilation to me? The article mentions several different GUI libraries that require dynamic linking and complicated build scripts, so even if you setup rustc to cross-compile (which isn't that hard but is an extra unnecessary step for your run-of-the-mill dev who just wants to get paid), getting the build scripts to cross-compile C++ libraries or testing the cross-compiled binaries with dynamically linked libraries is a pain, assuming your build scripts even let you do that.

All of this is avoidable by building from Windows. Or I guess you can not target Windows. That works too, but most businesses won't see that as an option.

[–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

as someone who used to develop a cross-platform (linux and windows) desktop application: the bulk of development took place on linux. i only ever booted to windows to build the app and make windows-exclusive adjustments, but never to actually develop any features

[–] monogram 0 points 9 hours ago

My past experience in desktop apps have been Flutter and Wails and have always cross compiled to an exe.

The less I need to touch windows the better.