this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
126 points (97.0% liked)

Rust

8136 readers
92 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] kewjo@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not sure what you're talking about then, in zigs case you don't need an exposed ABI to use existing c code?

in terms of performance it will always be ambiguous as implementations are hard to compare across languages, however they use llvm as an alternative to support architectures as they build out their native compiler. in the transition for x86_64 they were seeing up to 70% increase in compile speeds. its still ambiguous as its dependent on their implementation of llvm, though its such a large increase it is still meaningful.

but i say all this as a rust and zig advocate where i would happily choose either over the the majority of alternatives.

[โ€“] BB_C@programming.dev 1 points 10 hours ago

exposed ABI

ABI is not something that gets "exposed" or not.

it will always be ambiguous as implementations are hard to compare across languages

Correct.

in the transition for x86_64 they were seeing up to 70% increase in compile speeds

And that was a part of what I was hinting at, because you get >>70% speed-up with Cranelift in most Rust projects. But in either case, faster code generation is not free lunch, hence the mention of comparable runtime performance of generated binaries.