3 ms·
Currently Rust's perfmance is about that of Java's. Which is and isn't in contention with C++. Something's yes, some no. Rust beats C++ in a few areas on averag
by valarauca1 12y ago
Currently Rust's perfmance is about that of Java's. Which is and isn't in contention with C++. Something's yes, some no. Rust beats C++ in a few areas on average (tree look ups for example) but that's about it.
It's not to early for it to be a concern. It should be a concern in system languages aiming to compete with lanagues like C/C++/Fortran. But I feel rust isn't in a terrible competition for being at least 15 years late to the party.
- cmrx64 12y agoDo you have specific benchmarks to back up this claim? I think it's completely unfounded. Every test we've done against C and C++, we're competitive. Exception is the performance of the IO/task runtime, which still needs work, but is unrelated to the language.
- dbaupp 12y agoThere's also the factor of immaturity: the language is young and changing, so it hasn't really been possible/sane to spend the effort writing high-performance micro-optimised libraries for various tasks.
- sanderjd 12y agoAre the IO/task runtime tests you've seen available to look at somewhere?
- steveklabnik 12y agoI'm thinking of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15363 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15363 as one example.
- sanderjd 12y agoGreat, thanks.