@rastilin @crazyeddie @scherzog @lina
I do not know what benchmark you are using as comparison as generally C++ is faster than C due to the optimizations afforded by templates.
Modern C++ and Rust are quite on par with one another, both performance-wise and safety-wise. And if a C++ developer tells me they "hate modern C++" I lose all respect for them whatsoever.
I feel like the resistance pulled by the Linux Kernel maintainers stems from ignorance of what Rust does, just like it was the case for C++ long ago. They are trapped in a bubble where they practice between 1 and 3 languages between C, bash and Python and do not have the capacity to currently work with Rust, and feel shoehorned into reviewing code they do not understand well enough
@Archivist @crazyeddie @scherzog @lina
I dug around for the article so I could reference it and I've linked it here. I'm referring to the second column of the first chart, which tracks runtime.
https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/
Their tests might be a bit simplistic, but even in more complex tests, Rust might be able to optimize more heavily in situations where C wouldn't be able to.
It's annoying to realize, that, for example, PHP is 27 times slower than C.
@Archivist @crazyeddie @scherzog @lina
I dug around for the article so I could reference it and I've linked it here. I'm referring to the second column of the first chart, which tracks runtime.
https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/
Their tests might be a bit simplistic, but even in more complex tests, Rust might be able to optimize more heavily in situations where C wouldn't be able to.