|
|
|
|
|
by v0y4g3r
802 days ago
|
|
I think no. In this particular case it involves how Rust handles lifetimes compared to other languages with garbage collector. Essentially it's a comparison between reference counting and tracing garbage collection based on reacheability. |
|
Worded differently: does the strict concept of ownership/lifestimes in Rust bias a default (naive) implementation towards lower performance (eg due to required copying) when compared to a naive Golang (or even Java) implementation?
I have no doubts that after heavy optimization, Rust beats languages such as Go & Java.