Yeah, about such benchmarks:

https://studygolang.com/resources/12288

https://hacker-news.news/post/28293057

I kind of have to agree with the guy there, it would be kind of trash if everyone just inlined assembly instructions. Manual SIMD already feels a bit like cheating. Ideally, there should be two solution categories, idiomatic solutions and optimised solutions. I would prefer if the idiomatic solutions matched what the average programmer would write.

I think we worry about performance far too much when choosing a language. However, when performance is important, it's important to recognise the different classes of languages, say {Go, Rust, C} vs {Python, JS, Ruby} in terms of speed and memory footprint vs productivity.

No inlining of assembly is required to vastly improve the performance of Go in many such benchmarks. Pool or Arena Allocation are commonly used techniques and whether or not they are "idiomatic" isn't even up for discussion any more since the stdlib includes the former.

> … stdlib includes the former.

sync.Pool — binary-trees Go #6 program

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

----

Go does provide GC

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29323468

Yeah, about such comments:

Go does provide GC

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29323468