ladyanita22

Many examples out there are broken. As a sidenote, I've been benchmarking Zig, Rust and C++ with a fibonacci benchmark and the results basically show that C++ is the fastest, but within a 3% margin of error against Rust and Zig, which are mostly similar (Rust so ever slightly faster).

What about Rust?

Is it mandatory?

Technically you could do the same in all three: C, C++ and Rust.

There's also this https://gergo.erdi.hu/blog/2021-09-18-rust_on_the_mos_6502__... for rust on the 6502.

I wonder how's the performance vs. C (for both, C# and Rust).

Edit: It's my understanding that the 6502 is extremely stack-limited, so a well-versed assembler would use the stack very little and allocate mostly on the heap. In C, you can replicate this with global variables, and I believe (and I would be very happy if someone related to the 6502 rust port could chime in here) on Rust you can do the same with `static mut` on Rust 2021 and `Unsafecell` on Rust 2024.

> Then RISC-V assembly will be the new C.

Yeah, I don't think so

For which applications would you say Rust isn't as capable as C++?

> or Rust isn’t as capable as C++ (also untrue for the vast majority of applications)

I wonder what are the applications for which that statement is true. So far I've found nothing apart from obscure/proprietary architectures for which Rust doesn't have a compiler (and that's not a problem of the language itself)

Because of the strong reaction against vaccination negationists, it seems we sadly are leaving stuff completely out of the debate and some topics have become forbidden. It's rather unfortunate, because this is a valid point.

How would Rust behave here? It'd be interesting to know if it's flexible enough to work as efficiently in these machines.

Exactly came to my mind.

Why is it better? Asking an honest question.

I understand that's not a language limitation, but rather a compiler/toolset/ecosystem issue (like not having a standard ABI?).

I ask becasue I wonder what's the real culprit here and whether it can be solved or if it's due to the language.

> If the a C++ file includes any C++ stdlib header it will also also become very large (tens of thousands of lines of gnarly template code for common headers like <vector> or <string>). If the unit of compilation is a crate in Rust it should actually be faster to build than typical C++ projects which often put the implementation for one class into one source file (and each of those source files is expanded to tens of thousands of lines of code after includes are resolved).

> C mostly doesn't suffer from this problem though, since C header typically are only a couple dozen or hundred lines of API declarations.

But then, there's no reason why Rust couldn't be like C. The issue comes from the dependencies and libraries bundled, which is not an issue per se of the language.

> Because Rust's unit of compilation (a crate) is very large. In C/C++ it's a single file.

What do you mean exactly here?

I wonder how would the performance of Rust be without the runtime checks and the std_library.

And why is the std_library less performant than, let's say, C's counterpart?

I'm not sure I'd be willing to lose the ability of upgrading and the flexibility of tailoring my PC just to have a more silent PC.

And then you'd pay much more because you're getting a powerful iGPU that you'll likely not use.

> Let's say that the CPU + powerful iGPU cost 95% of what a discrete CPU and GPU cost

The main advantage of APUs would be the costs (theoretically). If it ends up being 95% of the cost of a more traditional architecture, what would be the point?

Yes, I'm just pointing out this blog's one

To be clear, this is a liberal economics blog, so expect at least some bias.

For reference, I've checked the Flatpak app and can confirm that the Flatpak for Exodus is the correct Electron app. In Flathub it's as easy as going to the github of the store and looking at the package's instructions. You'll see what it does is basically downloading the ZIP from the offical Exodus website and run it.

Gnome uses 2GB at most when not memory-constrained.

In my experience desktop linux is significantly lighter than macOS though

Do you have any real hard data that lets you to claim that macOS or iOS are more efficient than Linux or even Windows?

care to explain?

Then don't.

I met 3 top managers from China (talking about very high-level managers) to whom I had to talk to and were kinda more challenging and open than the other Chinese I had to work with, but nowhere near the Germans, Americans or Italians.

Confucian cultures

You can kinda enforce it from the IT side, though.