https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
This is a handy resource, though no benchmarks are ever perfect. Rust comes out faster on about half the algorithms. They're pretty close though.
This is a handy resource, though no benchmarks are ever perfect. Rust comes out faster on about half the algorithms. They're pretty close though.
n-body Rust #7 program 16.37s to complete and log all make actions
n-body C++ g++ #2 program 6.22s to complete and log all make actions
https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
Something seemed a bit weird with those numbers to me. My heavily loaded 2015 MacBook Air, which is also overheating, took <5s to compile nbody with the same Rust version and command line. The ratio remains about the same though - a similar GCC version is also much faster. Turns out, the hardware is really, really old ("Measured on a quad-core 2.4Ghz Intel® Q6600® with 3.8 GiB of RAM and 250GB SATA II disk drive; using Ubuntu™ 19.10 Linux x64 5.3.0-29-generic.").
So for that back-of-the-envelope comparison of compile times (of 300 line tiny tiny programs) it really really doesn't matter that "the hardware is really, really old" :-)
"relative ones" :-)
True.
Although if jonny383 actually wanted to know how many seconds then shouldn't our answer be — it depends.