3 ms·

The problem fat pointer based implementations are massively slower. Rust aims to provide safety without massive performance penalties. If one wanted safety with

• dependenttypes 6y ago
  > The problem fat pointer based implementations are massively slower I am challenging that. I do not believe that a C implementation that uses fat pointers needs to be any slower than Rust. > If one wanted safety without performance they would just use java or similar. Or C with a safe implementation.
  • steveklabnik 6y ago
    Yeah like, rust also uses fat pointers. They should be equivalent. The issue is pervasiveness not speed.