2 ms·

Did you try looking for Rust bindings to ImageMagick? If it's really that much faster, it might make sense to just call out to it. I found https://github.com/

• littlestymaar 7y ago
  It was much faster (between 3 and 5 times) but performance wasn't a critical part on this project, the ease of use and deployment was higher on the list. Also, I'm not sure I would trust imagemagick enough anymore to put it on a web-facing server, since its security track record doesn't smell that good [1]. But I was still disappointed by the poor performance of the `image` library because Rust has shown in many areas that it has potential to write code which is as fast as C, and in this case it didn't deliver. [1]: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list.php?vendor_id=1749&product_id=&version_id=&page=1&hasexp=0&opdos=0&opec=0&opov=0&opcsrf=0&opgpriv=0&opsqli=0&opxss=0&opdirt=0&opmemc=0&ophttprs=0&opbyp=0&opfileinc=0&opginf=0&cvssscoremin=0&cvssscoremax=0&year=0&month=0&cweid=0&order=3&trc=505&sha=cad8183bd44fc4f183038a1ca8490122ee688f30 https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list.php?vendor_id=...
  • superpermutat0r 7y ago
    It didn't deliver because the library is not good, not because rust is a bad language.