3 ms·
When you get sufficiently close to the metal, the performance gains seem to be coming from better algorithms rather than from the programming language. Like you
by nequo 4y ago
When you get sufficiently close to the metal, the performance gains seem to be coming from better algorithms rather than from the programming language. Like you are saying:
> The reasons for these gaps can include things like it being harder to use the optimal data structure for your application (eg C code using red-black trees instead of btrees in 2023)
Bryan Cantrill described this experience[1] and maybe that is exactly what you are referring to.
But if you're just looking for a language to get work done with, does it matter if Rust is faster because of better off-the-shelf data structures and algorithms or because of some inherent magic in the programming language?
[1] See point 9 here: http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2018/09/18/falling-in-love-with-rust/ http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2018/09/18/falling-in-love-with-...
- pclmulqdq 4y agoYes, because my current alternative (modern C++ with Folly/Absl) provides those data structures already, so there's no real benefit to using the new thing.
- nequo 4y agoThat's great for you! Then stick with your current setup. I don't already know C++. For me, learning Rust is easier than learning safe C++. I imagine that there are many people in a similar situation for whom Rust makes more sense than C++. That doesn't mean that it makes more sense for everyone.