On Friday, 19 May 2017 at 13:35:07 UTC, Tobias Mueller wrote:
On Friday, 19 May 2017 at 08:58:33 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote:
On Thursday, 18 May 2017 at 19:33:25 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Thanks for the link. I don't understand what they mean in
saying I don't get Rust's vision.
A lot of Rust users seem to think they own the memory safe
market. Language with GC = Bad. What they forget is that a
good GC can be unnoticeable in code execution.
Take these silly benchmarks:
https://github.com/kostya/benchmarks
Despite Rust not being a GC language, you expect the Rust
results to have a lower memory usage then D. Or D to have a
larger execution time for the lower memory ( early GC cleanup
cycles = lower memory usage but performance hits ).
The D Ldc vs Rust are the most relevant as its the same
backend. But even with DMD or GCC those cpu/mem results can be
better then Rust. Even Crystal pushes better results on the
same backend.
But i was under the assumption that anything that is not Rust
is simply bad? /s
I wonder, did you actually read the comments in linked thread
in /r/rust? I don't see any that would support that.
The comments about D are actually fairly positive in that
thread.
I believe he is poking fun at "the typical Reddit Rustacean".
