3 ms·

> The great achievement that Rust brings to the table is that it gives you the safety of a traditionally dynamic language like Java or JS with native performanc

> The great achievement that Rust brings to the table is that it gives you the safety of a traditionally dynamic language like Java or JS with native performance. Plenty of other modern and old languages are equally fast and memory safe. Calling it a "great achievement" is unfair to other languages.

est31 8y ago
Which language do you have in mind?
adwn 8y ago
> Plenty of other modern and old languages are equally fast and memory safe. Name three. I don't know any language that is both memory safe and as fast as Rust. ATS might fit the bill, though from what I've read, it has rather exotic semantics and an even steeper learning curve than Rust.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Ada, D, Swift, .NET Native, OCaml, Haskell, Oberon-2, Modula-3, Active Oberon, Component Pascal, Sing#, System C#, Eiffel, Java (AOT compiled), Common Lisp, Swift.
  - adwn 8y ago
    > Ada, D, Swift, .NET Native, OCaml, Haskell, Oberon-2, Modula-3, Active Oberon, Component Pascal, Sing#, System C#, Eiffel, Java (AOT compiled), Common Lisp, Swift. None of those are as fast as Rust, at least not in all cases [1]. Sure, they're within the same order of magnitude performance-wise, but software engineering is probably the only technical discipline which dismisses a factor of 2 as irrelevant – compare the automotive, aerospace, or energy generation industries, which fight for single-digit percent efficiency gains. [1] I'm talking about idiomatic code, not turning-Haskell-into-an-even-uglier-version-of-C or similar.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Not as fast as Rust? It seems to me you have some learning and profiling to do. Hint, many of them do enjoy multiple implementations from several vendors and even had OSes richer than Redox available. Also some of them do enjoy LLVM backends.
      - adwn 8y ago
        > It seems to me you have some learning and profiling to do. Please, enlighten me. If you could link some benchmark results, it would be very much appreciated. > many of them do enjoy multiple implementations from several vendors Having multiple implementations doesn't make a language faster. > and even had OSes richer than Redox available Being able to write an OS in a language doesn't allow any conclusions about its performance. > Also some of them do enjoy LLVM backends. An LLVM backend doesn't necessarily make a language as fast as C or Rust. You could write an LLVM backend for Python and it would still be slow as molasses.
        pjmlp 8y ago
        > Please, enlighten me. If you could link some benchmark results, it would be very much appreciated. Well you just did a Rust Force HN post, bashing languages regarding performance, some of them like Ada, being in production since the early 80's, controlling human critical systems in real time. Besides GNAT, there are PTC ObjectAda, GreenHills Ada, SCORE Ada, PowerAda, Tartan Ada all being used in automotive, aerospace, or energy generation industries, where zero lines of Rust code exist today in production. But hey, Rust is faster. /s > Having multiple implementations doesn't make a language faster. Sure it does, it is a big performance difference to use JRuby or MRI Ruby. > Being able to write an OS in a language doesn't allow any conclusions about its performance. Slow OSes don't get users. > An LLVM backend doesn't necessarily make a language as fast as C or Rust. You could write an LLVM backend for Python and it would still be slow as molasses. You are quite right, after all D beats Rust when using LLVM in compilation speed. It is all a matter of man power, willingness to pursue certain goals and skills.
        8y ago

est31 8y ago

Which language do you have in mind?

adwn 8y ago

> Plenty of other modern and old languages are equally fast and memory safe. Name three. I don't know any language that is both memory safe and as fast as Rust. ATS might fit the bill, though from what I've read, it has rather exotic semantics and an even steeper learning curve than Rust.

pjmlp 8y ago
Ada, D, Swift, .NET Native, OCaml, Haskell, Oberon-2, Modula-3, Active Oberon, Component Pascal, Sing#, System C#, Eiffel, Java (AOT compiled), Common Lisp, Swift.
- adwn 8y ago
  > Ada, D, Swift, .NET Native, OCaml, Haskell, Oberon-2, Modula-3, Active Oberon, Component Pascal, Sing#, System C#, Eiffel, Java (AOT compiled), Common Lisp, Swift. None of those are as fast as Rust, at least not in all cases [1]. Sure, they're within the same order of magnitude performance-wise, but software engineering is probably the only technical discipline which dismisses a factor of 2 as irrelevant – compare the automotive, aerospace, or energy generation industries, which fight for single-digit percent efficiency gains. [1] I'm talking about idiomatic code, not turning-Haskell-into-an-even-uglier-version-of-C or similar.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Not as fast as Rust? It seems to me you have some learning and profiling to do. Hint, many of them do enjoy multiple implementations from several vendors and even had OSes richer than Redox available. Also some of them do enjoy LLVM backends.
    - adwn 8y ago
      > It seems to me you have some learning and profiling to do. Please, enlighten me. If you could link some benchmark results, it would be very much appreciated. > many of them do enjoy multiple implementations from several vendors Having multiple implementations doesn't make a language faster. > and even had OSes richer than Redox available Being able to write an OS in a language doesn't allow any conclusions about its performance. > Also some of them do enjoy LLVM backends. An LLVM backend doesn't necessarily make a language as fast as C or Rust. You could write an LLVM backend for Python and it would still be slow as molasses.
      - pjmlp 8y ago
        > Please, enlighten me. If you could link some benchmark results, it would be very much appreciated. Well you just did a Rust Force HN post, bashing languages regarding performance, some of them like Ada, being in production since the early 80's, controlling human critical systems in real time. Besides GNAT, there are PTC ObjectAda, GreenHills Ada, SCORE Ada, PowerAda, Tartan Ada all being used in automotive, aerospace, or energy generation industries, where zero lines of Rust code exist today in production. But hey, Rust is faster. /s > Having multiple implementations doesn't make a language faster. Sure it does, it is a big performance difference to use JRuby or MRI Ruby. > Being able to write an OS in a language doesn't allow any conclusions about its performance. Slow OSes don't get users. > An LLVM backend doesn't necessarily make a language as fast as C or Rust. You could write an LLVM backend for Python and it would still be slow as molasses. You are quite right, after all D beats Rust when using LLVM in compilation speed. It is all a matter of man power, willingness to pursue certain goals and skills.
        8y ago