5 ms·
TLDR: C is fastest, Rust is safest.
by dahfizz 3y ago
TLDR: C is fastest, Rust is safest.
- xeonmc 3y agoand C++ would be easiest?
- morning-coffee 3y agoeasiest to blow your foot off with, yes.
- belter 3y agoeasier to blow your whole leg off according to Bjarne Stroustrup
- huhtenberg 3y agoIs the plussest.
- Voultapher 3y agoI'm kind of sad that's your takeaway :(
- verdagon 3y agoI don't think the article made that conclusion? I see this in there: > As seen in the benchmarks, the current Rust standard library unstable sort implementation outperforms the C++ standard library counterparts And I can't find any generalizations like that from the author, though I may have missed it.
- hawski 3y agoYou're talking about C++, he is talking about C.
- Ar-Curunir 3y agoLiterally the second paragraph : “ Overall no correlation between performance and safety could be found, nor whether safe or unsafe internal abstractions are used.”
- kobalsky 3y agoYou could replace Rust for almost any language in that assertion and it would be true, so it would be good to clarify that Rust does not trail of behind C much, and it's even faster than C on 4 out of 14 tests.
- queuebert 3y agoI feel like these tests are really testing the ability of the language to give hints to the compiler in its attempt to generate efficient machine code.
- dralley 3y agoThe comparison involved different and not completely overlapping sort algorithms. If you want to say this you have to first prove it's not just the algorithm.
- ape4 3y ago"As seen in the benchmarks, the current Rust standard library unstable sort implementation outperforms the C++ standard library counterparts. "