News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

edevrk

Re:Performance of Rust Language [pdf] on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @07:19AM (#48278160)
Your comment is at odds with the submission and lots of comments here.

Did you generate your comment using LLM?

> negligable

Negligible.

Re:Performance of Rust Language [pdf] on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @06:53AM (#48277934)
Why do you sound like a cheap whore putting on airs? As if, you couldn't be honest or competent even if your life depended on it.
Re:Performance of Rust Language [pdf] on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @06:06AM (#48277516)
> Panics in Rust do not currently time-travel like that (including panics from failed bounds checks), and that's a good thing.

Is it a "good thing" in all ways? Does it make Rust slower than C++ in some cases? And if Rust wants to catch up to C++ in regards to performance, do you believe that Rust people like yourself will have to convince C++ language people to remove time travel optimizations? Not very nice or honorable of you. Why not focus on making Rust faster instead?

Edit:

Why does kibwen sound like a cheap whore putting on airs? As if, kibwen couldn't be honest or competent even if its (pronoun: thing) life depended on it.