No: Linux x64 is currently a source-development platform, not the debugger’s stated supported target, and DWARF support remains a future direction.

• The README explicitly limits the current debugger to “local-machine Windows x64 debugging with PDBs,” so native Linux debugging and DWARF are outside the current support scope.
• The README describes “native Linux debugging and DWARF debug info” as future expansion, not an existing capability.
• The project does provide a Linux x64 development path with GCC or Clang and dependencies such as FreeType, X11, X11 extensions, GL, and EGL. This shows that the code can be developed on Linux; it does not establish that Linux/DWARF targets can be debugged.

A Linux x64 user can therefore build and study the project, but should not treat the current version as a direct replacement for a Linux/DWARF debugger.

Yes: this is exactly the large-linking scenario described by the README, provided that the project does not depend on LTO.

• RAD Linker targets “generating x64 PE/COFF binaries” and can create RDI natively. One stated purpose is handling “huge executables that otherwise create broken PDBs that overflow internal 32-bit tables.”
• In the README’s tests, projects with multiple gigabytes of debug information achieved link times about 50% faster. This is a project benchmark and may not reproduce for every build.
• Its command-line syntax is fully compatible with MSVC, and it can still generate standard PDB files, so adoption does not require an immediate switch to RDI-only output.
• The README explicitly says that link-time optimizations are not supported, so an LTO-dependent project cannot assume a seamless migration.

For an x64 PE/COFF project with genuinely huge debug information and no LTO dependency, RAD Linker/RDI is a strong candidate. With mandatory LTO, it is not currently a direct replacement.

It depends: the README reports a clear performance benefit and recommends isolated environments, but it also warns about Windows large-page instability.

• The README says that enabling large pages can “reduce link time by another 25%,” but this is a project benchmark and does not describe your project size, memory configuration, or concurrency.
• The option must be explicitly enabled with /rad_large_pages; it is off by default.
• The project recommends using it only in resettable environments such as Docker or VMs, because standard Windows environments may fragment memory quickly and force a reboot.
• The option applies to RAD Linker’s large-link workflow; it does not imply the same benefit for the debugger or RDI itself.

Thus, it is worth testing in a resettable isolated environment. For a long-lived standard Windows workstation, the README’s risk warning does not support enabling it by default.

Yes: the README provides a control for parallel linking, but it does not define the correct concurrency configuration for your machine.

• RAD Linker creates as many worker threads as CPU cores by default. When several linkers run simultaneously, each job may compete for the full CPU and memory capacity.
• The README explicitly provides /rad_workers to limit the worker count of an individual linker, directly addressing parallel-build scenarios.
• The linker targets “gigantic executables,” so a single link may already have substantial memory pressure; the README gives no peak-memory curve for different worker counts.
• /rad_large_pages is not a general parallelism solution. The README warns that, on standard Windows environments, it can quickly fragment memory and force a reboot.

It is therefore suitable for a parallel build system, but /rad_workers must be treated as a scheduling parameter for each link process. Large pages should not be enabled by default.

It depends: the project already provides conversion and parsing components, but RDI construction, serialization, and interfaces are still evolving, so it should not be treated as a fully stable public standard.

• radbin can convert native debug-information formats to RDI and produce textual dumps of RDI contents; the debugger can also access it through the --bin entry point.
• src/lib_rdi defines the format types and functions in rdi.h and rdi.c, while rdi_parse.* provides parsing helpers, making the code suitable for format research.
• The README explicitly calls src/lib_rdi_make an “in-progress library for constructing and serializing RDI data,” so interfaces for generating RDI may change.
• RDI is designed as the debugger’s native consumption format, not described as a stable cross-tool exchange standard.

It is suitable as a research, prototyping, or in-house toolchain foundation. If you need a long-term stable external format contract, version pinning and compatibility policy must be established first.

It depends: the platform, debug format, and debugging model match, but the project is still Alpha and should not automatically replace a mature debugger.

• The README explicitly supports “local-machine Windows x64 debugging with PDBs” and describes the tool as a “native, user-mode, multi-process, graphical debugger,” matching this client environment.
• The current release is v0.9.29-alpha; the README asks users to submit crash dumps, build information, reproduction steps, and test executables, indicating that stability is still being validated.
• The main README does not document debugger usage. Detailed instructions are included with releases or in the build directory after a local build.

It is therefore suitable for evaluation and supplementary debugging in a Windows x64/PDB workflow, but not as the sole daily debugger while it remains Alpha.