News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Is Rust faster than C? by groundzeros2015 on Wednesday January 14, 2026 @01:02PM (#46619646)
And yet despite that theoretical limit C compiles faster than any other language. Even C++ is very fast if you are not using header-only style.

What’s better? Rust? Haskell? Swift?

It’s very hard to do multithreading at a more granular level without hitting amdahl’s law and synchronization traps.

Re:Is Rust faster than C? by pjmlp on Thursday January 15, 2026 @01:55AM (#46629004)
No it doesn't, try it against a language with modules support, even the oldie Turbo Pascal for MS-DOS.
Re:Is Rust faster than C? by groundzeros2015 on Saturday January 17, 2026 @11:20AM (#46659238)
Turbo pascal compiles faster because of better parallelization?
Re:Is Rust faster than C? by gf000 on Thursday January 15, 2026 @04:55AM (#46630385)
It reminds me of the joke that "I can do math very fast", probed with a multiplication and immediately answering some total bollocks answer. - "That's not even close" - "Yeah, but it was fast"

Sure, it's not a trivial problem, but why wouldn't we want better compilation results/developer ergonomics at the price of more compiler complexity and some minimal performance penalty?

And it's not like the performance doesn't have its own set of negatives, like header-only libraries are a hack directly manifested from this compilation model.

Re:Is Rust faster than C? by groundzeros2015 on Saturday January 17, 2026 @11:19AM (#46659230)
your topic is shifting from multi-threading benefits in language compilation, to ergonomics of C headers.