> It's about 10% slower than what could be achieved with C What does that even mean? Are you saying that you have a proof of the theoretically fastest C progr

> It's about 10% slower than what could be achieved with C What does that even mean? Are you saying that you have a proof of the theoretically fastest C program that would implement the same functionality and it's 10% slower than that? Does the C you're comparing it against use the Disruptor pattern too? Or is this just a comparison against a naive, single-threaded C program? How does that number vary with the overall heap size of the program? Numbers like this get thrown around that strike me as incredibly dubious.