Re:Rust programs versus C++ g++ (by benchmark task performance)
by jokoon on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @07:29AM
(#15913788)
I have more faith in the evolution of rust than C++. C++ has a lot of backward compatibility pressure with large large companies. Rust is new and is already quite a good language.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Rust programs versus C++ g++ (by benchmark task performance)
by igouy on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @11:00AM
(#15915039)
Not a matter of faith but a matter of contributing better programs to the benchmarks game.
Re:Rust programs versus C++ g++ (by benchmark task performance)
by mmstick on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @06:58PM
(#15918839)
He's referring to how the language and it's ecosystem will evolve from this point forward in comparison to the C++ ecosystem. In addition, the programs that are there should be just fine. There is a lot of room for advancing the Rust compiler to generate more efficient routines from the same code. The Rust compiler, after all, is not taking full advantage of all of the available compiler information. A significant volume of information is simply discarded at the moment. C++ compilers don't have the same degree of headroom for possible future optimizations.
Re:Rust programs versus C++ g++ (by benchmark task performance)
by igouy on Thursday December 14, 2017 @01:49PM
(#15925421)
> He's referring to …
I know; that was not what the comment he replied to was referring to.
The comment he replied to was referring to the actual much better performance of one of those C++ benchmarks game programs, contributed just 6 weeks ago.