News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1. Parent comment

Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by berkut on Wednesday December 31, 2014 @07:32AM (#8819094)
Do you mean compared to C++ compiled with LLVM (as opposed to GCC)?

I've found that LLVM is generally faster than GCC and in some cases significantly so.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by yuriks on Wednesday December 31, 2014 @07:44AM (#8819122)
Yes, I compared Rust and Clang using similar LLVM versions and the Rust version of the code consistently beat Clang.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by darkpore on Wednesday December 31, 2014 @08:00AM (#8819170)
Not the same version then? :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by kibwen on Wednesday December 31, 2014 @01:12PM (#8820370)
For the moment Rust is using a custom fork of LLVM while waiting for its patches to be upstreamed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by zxcdw on Wednesday December 31, 2014 @02:50PM (#8820797)
Hasn't this been the case like forever (at least for the past two years)?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Porting a Ray Tracer to Rust, Part 1 by kibwen on Thursday January 01, 2015 @09:07PM (#8825195)
They keep coming up with new patches to upstream. :)
[ Parent | on HN ]