2 ms·
You seem to be implying rust = fast, the end. I'm implying algorithms and design choices = fast. Those decisions generally (though not always) are far more effe
by socalgal2 1y ago
You seem to be implying rust = fast, the end. I'm implying algorithms and design choices = fast. Those decisions generally (though not always) are far more effective at speed than language choice.
I watched the video linked above on uv. They went over the optimizations. The big wins had nothing to do with rust and everything to do with design/algo choices.
You could have also done without the insults. You have no idea who I am and my experiences. I've shipped several AAA games written in C/C++ and assembly. I know how to optimize. I also know how dynamic languages work. I also know when people are making up bullshit about "it's fast because it's in rust!". No, that is not why it's fast.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- collinmanderson 1y agoI agree there are lot of big wins in uv that tools written in python could take advantage of, and ultimately I think uv is fast because they're obsessed with making it fast, which is why they chose to use rust. I don't see that same level speed obsession with the other tools. Instead of "It's fast because it's in rust", I'd say: "It's fast because they chose to use rust for their python tool, which means they care a lot about speed."