[compiler-guy]

That’s puzzling to me too. Rust is a great language, and probably makes developing Wild faster. But the complexity of incremental linking doesn’t stem from the linker’s implementation language. It stems from all the tracking, reserved spacing, and other issues required to link a previously linked binary (or at least parts of it) a second time.

[IshKebab]

Rust allows your to enforce more invariants at compile time, so implementing a complex system where you are likely to make a mistake and violate those invariants is easier.

[tialaramex]

I would guess the idea is that in Rust the complexity is cheaper on a "per unit" basis so you can afford more complexity. So yes, it is a more complicated problem than the previous linkers, but, in Rust maybe you can get that done anyway.