3 ms·

“Native performance” in this context means compared to scripting languages, not low-level languages like C. Of course, Go offers native performance relative to

• nosianu 9mo ago
  > scripting languages The "script" is compiled all the way down to machine code by the runtime, for heavily used paths. The black/white distinction of "scripted" vs. "compiled" does not exist, has not for many years. Too many of these discussions and arguments seem to be stuck in the 1990s technology level. It is much more mixed and complex now.
  • lock1 9mo ago
    It's still a useful distinction IMO. "Script" PLs tend to be interpreted, dynamic, and handwave various machine-level details. In contrast, "compiled" PLs usually provide you the constructs to manipulate native machine-level features directly. Realistically, communities around "script" languages aren't going to talk much about memory layout or syscall. Instead, getting the job done fast (devtime-wise) is their main focus. On the other hand, "compiled" languages tend to draw people who like squeezing every bit of computing power from their computer, even though it tends to raise the complexity.
• m00dy 9mo ago
  I think the author puts Rust and Go in the same basket, and it is something that I can't agree.