|
|
|
|
|
|
by dwohnitmok
1710 days ago
|
|
|
I think you're missing the point of my comments. I know neither enough of CL nor Rust to make a comment on the performance (I have less than ~1000 lines of experience in either and have only built the smallest of toy projects in either language). This is my original sentiment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28842546 mst stated that the author explicitly called out the Rust code as suboptimal. That is a misreading of the original text, which was referring to a previous iteration. The author (and you) clearly does not think the current Rust code is suboptimal. |
|
|
Sorry if it looked like I was being harsh on you particularly, I was not... I was being harsh on people making comments like "this Rust code is very slow" without showing their faster code, making suggestions that would almost certainly be slower or not even compile and other similar things I observed in this thread.
Never believe anyone saying "this could be much faster" without showing their code so people can actually check it.
I will believe the OP's code is slow when I see a faster implementation, which I haven't.