3 ms·

I understand their improvement figures exactly as you wrote, "C could be as fast, but with a lot more effort". Yes, if your code in Lang-X is faster than C, it

I understand their improvement figures exactly as you wrote, "C could be as fast, but with a lot more effort". Yes, if your code in Lang-X is faster than C, it's almost certainly a skill issue somewhere in the C implementation. However, in the day-to-day, if I can make my code run faster in Lang-X than C, especially if I'm using Lang-X for only a couple of months and C potentially for decades, that is absolutely meaningful. Sure, we can make the C code just as fast, but it's not viable to spend that much time and expertise on every small issue. Outside of "which lang is better" discussions on online forums, it doesn't matter how fast you can theoretically make your program, it matters how fast you actually make it with the constraints your business have (time usually).

andai 2y ago
The skill issue part is a pretty interesting part of the conversation. I'm always reminded of this video, where the author writes the same program in Rust and Go. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GX2mTUtfo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GX2mTUtfo > Now, the Rust version took me about five times as long as the Go version > The Go one performed almost identically well Now this was for netcode rather than number crunching. But I actually had a similar surprise with number crunching, with C# and C++. I wrote the same program (rational approximation of Pi), line for line, in both languages, and the C# version ran faster. Apparently C# aggressively optimizes hot code paths while running, whereas to get that behavior in C++, you need to collect profiler data and use a special compiler flag.
- serial_dev 2y ago
  Well, what I said is also true for Rust and Go. Sure if your Go code is faster than your Rust code, one could argue you have skill issues in Rust, but if to get the Rust program faster than your Go program requires 10x time (or more), it’s fair to say that Go is faster and simpler, even if it would be more precise to say that the Go code you can write performs as well as the Rust code you can write.

andai 2y ago

The skill issue part is a pretty interesting part of the conversation. I'm always reminded of this video, where the author writes the same program in Rust and Go. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GX2mTUtfo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GX2mTUtfo > Now, the Rust version took me about five times as long as the Go version > The Go one performed almost identically well Now this was for netcode rather than number crunching. But I actually had a similar surprise with number crunching, with C# and C++. I wrote the same program (rational approximation of Pi), line for line, in both languages, and the C# version ran faster. Apparently C# aggressively optimizes hot code paths while running, whereas to get that behavior in C++, you need to collect profiler data and use a special compiler flag.

serial_dev 2y ago
Well, what I said is also true for Rust and Go. Sure if your Go code is faster than your Rust code, one could argue you have skill issues in Rust, but if to get the Rust program faster than your Go program requires 10x time (or more), it’s fair to say that Go is faster and simpler, even if it would be more precise to say that the Go code you can write performs as well as the Rust code you can write.