News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The relative performance of C and Rust by bjourne on Saturday September 29, 2018 @12:56PM (#18101407)
The comment is wrong for C, but could be right for C++. The data structures in STL are all implemented as red-black trees. They can't be rewritten as B-trees because of some iterator/synchronization/backwards compatibility mess.

I once did a similar benchmark to the one in the article and found that Rust outperformed C++ because the C++ code was using the builtin std::map. But for reeeeeeally big datasets PostgreSQL beats them both so who cares. :p

Re:The relative performance of C and Rust by stochastic_monk on Saturday September 29, 2018 @01:24PM (#18101580)
There are STL-compatible B-tree implementations in C++, so I would still use one of those instead of std::map. Besides, std::*map implementations are all rather slow.