> And it looks as if some of the complexity of the x86_64 instruction set is a liability with respect to performance compared to "simpler" instruction sets like

> And it looks as if some of the complexity of the x86_64 instruction set is a liability with respect to performance compared to "simpler" instruction sets like ARM. I don't think any of the issues with Intel's x86-64 chips are due to the instruction-set, they're due to the chips' internal architectures. ARM CPUs are by no means 'safe by nature'. > the more that I write, the more that I wonder if some of that complexity is due to unsolved design problems in the core of the language > Rust sometimes feels like a language which is missing that one key piece which would keep all of this complexity under control. I'm reminded of a quote [0] from Bjarne Stroustrup, creator of C++: > Within C++, there is a much smaller and cleaner language struggling to get out. [0] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bjarne_Stroustrup https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bjarne_Stroustrup