News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust programs versus Go by weberc2 on Wednesday May 16, 2018 @09:32AM (#17082211)
> I disagree with the people saying the benchmarks game is useless. It mostly seems to conform to my own experiences with the various languages involved.

I think it can only tell you about the performance cieling, and even then it can't tell you that for languages like Go where fairly obvious optimizations (like arenas) are prohibited while all manner of clever tricks are permitted for other languages.

Your remarks on performance comparisons were really insightful.

Re:Rust programs versus Go by igouy on Monday May 21, 2018 @11:02AM (#17118866)
>> obvious optimizations (like arenas) are prohibited

No, not prohibited.

Which widely-used third-party Go library do you suggest people use to implement Go binary-trees programs?

Re:Rust programs versus Go by weberc2 on Wednesday May 23, 2018 @11:34AM (#17134970)
> No, not prohibited.

Yes, prohibited

> Which widely-used third-party Go library do you suggest people use to implement Go binary-trees programs?

What does this have to do with my post?

Re:Rust programs versus Go by igouy on Friday May 25, 2018 @01:19PM (#17155870)
>> What does this have to do with my post?

You falsely claim that Go arenas are prohibited.

Show that there is a widely-used third-party Go library that provides arenas, which could be used to implement Go binary-trees programs, to support your claim.