Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by brundolf on Tuesday December 01, 2020 @06:18PM
(#25271359)
Most of Rust's difficulty comes from the borrow-checker. And if you're mostly doing linear work, if you're doing a lot of math, if you have a lot of pretty flat data structures, if you mostly keep things on the stack, then you may not run up against the borrow-checker that often. I would assume (I don't know for sure) that scientific computing tends to do more of this kind of stuff, and not as much heap-juggling/heterogeneous data modeling as, say, a web server.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by johncolanduoni on Tuesday December 01, 2020 @06:35PM
(#25271507)
I’ve done simulation work using Rust and in particular the Rayon data-parallelism library and this has been my experience. The kind of organization of data you need to do for good cache behavior (e.g. split data by phases of algorithm, divide work by memory destination and only randomly read when possible) meshes quite well with the borrow checker restrictions.
Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by ephimetheus on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @02:03AM
(#25273912)
Really depends I guess. I can tell you that at least for HEP, especially for the LHC experiments, software is nothing like what you describe. Parts are designed and optimized in such a way but I would imagine it it to be a gigantic effort to try and wrangle with the borrow checker for the rest of the software.