Would you like to point out specific instances of this "noise"? The C++ code looks like straightforward "C code" because it's using the OpenMP parallel for. If

Would you like to point out specific instances of this "noise"? The C++ code looks like straightforward "C code" because it's using the OpenMP parallel for. If it dealt with threads explicitly it would not look as pretty. I do agree that the Rust code has some verbosity, for example there are a lot of type annotations and using named constants instead of magic values. For example (C++): int na = (n + 8 - 1) / 8; Versus (you could write this like the above too): let vecs_per_col = (n + simd::f32x8_LENGTH - 1) / simd::f32x8_LENGTH; An example of the type annotations (are they really necessary?): let pack_simd_row = |(i, (vd_stripe, vt_stripe)): (usize, (&mut [f32x8], &mut [f32x8]))| { Comparing the actual internals of the algorithm is quite straightforward, e.g. look at the middle loop (lines 70-82 in Rust vs. 58-97 in C++). Do note that the C++ code is loop unrolled by hand which makes it look simpler. In the Rust code, there's a pretty cool feature where multithreading can be toggled on/off with a compile time flag, see parts with: #[cfg(not(feature = "no-multi-thread"))] If the C++ example wouldn't use OpenMP, this would be pretty impossible to achieve without being noisy too. Also note that even with OpenMP, it would be quite easy to create a memory unsafety issue in the C++ code by for example accessing an array out of bounds inside the loop body. Apart from these, I have no problems reading and understanding the C++ or Rust code (and I'm a noob with Rust).