jack_clayto

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   True thanks! I updated the example again, profiled this time to make sure each program is actually allocating.
2. 2.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   I did a lot more benchmarks and Rust TCO is happening in a lot of scenarios. Thanks for pointing this out, I updated this section in the blog.
3. 3.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   Hi thanks for the discussion, I tried out a bunch of different benchmarks, and Rust TCO is actually working as you say it does. I removed that part from the blog. Thanks very much for the discussion, I definitely need to upskill on assembly
4. 4.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   Here's at least three Rust veterans in this thread explaining that move is just a memcpy which can be optimized away: https://users.rust-lang.org/t/move-semantics-rust-vs-c/61274... I removed criterion::black
5. 5.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   I updated the blog with full benchmark reproduction instructions, I also removed criterion::black_box altogether, and it resulted in no performance difference. Removing benchmark.keep from Mojo causes it to optimize away everything and run
6. 6.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   This is all in the design stage, we realize how important it is to the wider community!
7. 7.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   Hi author here, Mojo has lifetimes and references! But they're in their infancy and being worked out in the standard library, before we document how to use them for external users. We need to iterate on the syntax and usability. Your p
8. 8.▲
   by jack_clayto 3y ago

   Hi author here, definitely not trying to diss Rust, I love Rust! I'm pointing out some interesting overheads that aren't well known by the average Rust programmer, which Mojo was able to improve upon with the power of hindsight an