←back to thread

Zlib-rs is faster than C

(trifectatech.org)
341 points dochtman | 1 comments | 16 Mar 25 19:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.257s | source
Show context
johnisgood ◴[16 Mar 25 20:00 UTC] No.43381735[source]▶
"faster than C" almost always boils down to different designs, implementations, algorithms, etc.

Perhaps it is faster than already-existing implementations, sure, but not "faster than C", and it is odd to make such claims.

replies(10): >>43381810 #>>43381813 #>>43381820 #>>43381959 #>>43382108 #>>43382124 #>>43382267 #>>43385171 #>>43386202 #>>43392542 #
layer8 ◴[16 Mar 25 21:00 UTC] No.43382267[source]▶
If anything, this should be “zlib-rs is faster than zlib-ng”, but not “$library is faster than $programming_language”.
replies(1): >>43382768 #
chjj[dead post] ◴[16 Mar 25 21:50 UTC] No.43382768[source]▶
[flagged]
pdimitar ◴[17 Mar 25 00:29 UTC] No.43383969[source]▶
I am hopping on Rust threads on HN very regularly and I have to tell you my anecdotal experience.

Which is: people complaining about Rust zealots are much more than actual Rust zealots. Thinking of it, I haven't seen a proper Rust zealot on HN for at least a year at this point.

So I don't know, maybe do less cheap digs. Tearing down straw men is pretty boring to watch.

replies(3): >>43385343 #>>43385702 #>>43388717 #
chjj ◴[17 Mar 25 04:58 UTC] No.43385343[source]▶
We have very different experiences then. Don't know what to tell you.

Every interaction I've had with a rust programmer has led me to believe they are a toxic community of cultists. It's unlike any programming community I've seen.

replies(4): >>43386363 #>>43386393 #>>43386555 #>>43386627 #
simonask ◴[17 Mar 25 09:24 UTC] No.43386555[source]▶
I mean, aren't you having such an interaction right now? Do you find this discussion toxic?
replies(2): >>43386615 #>>43387368 #
1. pdimitar ◴[17 Mar 25 09:35 UTC] No.43386615[source]▶
What I find toxic is the claim of zealotry when I can't see any, not on HN anyway.

So I called the poster out to show proof. So far there's none, except one Twitter post (because we all know that's the best technical discussion forum on the planet, clearly) which does not surprise me at all.

So they are the ones who get triggered by something that does not exist.

That is what is toxic.

If you go around claiming fantasies and people call you out then that falls more under curiosity and discussion. Not toxicity.