Super cool!
In the comparison table, you indicate indexing times. Could you also measure memory usage, since that's the stated goal of the project?
In the comparison table, you indicate indexing times. Could you also measure memory usage, since that's the stated goal of the project?
The difference, however, is that with Rust Glancer you don’t need full reindexing often, so it probably compensates for that to a degree.
But importantly it’s not reindexing the entire project, which is the expensive operation. So you have higher peak RAM when opening a brand new project, but much lower RAM usage while working on the project.
And note that on dirty buffers Rust Glancer doesn't do reindexing at all: it reuses the last available analysis, plus it does syntax-based shallow overlay that is sufficient to be useful but doesn't necessarily detect semantic changes. It's a tradeoff, but this tradeoff makes Rust Glancer competitive in terms of latency with rust-analyzer without compromising RAM and while keeping your CPU cool.
> it completely reindexes the single file that’s saved
This is true, though I have to mention that change in the file might invalidate its reverse dependencies, which can make the partial analysis bigger than just one file/crate, but it's still very fast in practice.
This is when you do full reindexing.
> Is that only an incremental indexing with normally low RAM usage?
Yup, on save you only update the crates that were invalidated.