Zlib-rs is faster than C

"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.

If anything, this should be “zlib-rs is faster than zlib-ng”, but not “$library is faster than $programming_language”.

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.

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.

I mean, aren't you having such an interaction right now? Do you find this discussion toxic?

I wouldn't go so far as to say toxic in this case, but their reaction to me having a differing opinion is certainly characteristic of rust developer pathology. Not sure why rust attracts these people. This phenomenon should probably be studied.

- Insult a group with generalization

- Members of the group respond non-kindly

- "Help! I am being repressed!"

I mean, maybe you should try more balanced take next time. Just a thought.

I don't ever recall saying I'm being repressed. Could you point out where I said that?

If you're referring to my above post, I'm pointing out that you're having a very emotional reaction to what I'm saying. That's typically what I see from rust developers.

Where do you see emotional reaction?

All I do in each reply is point out how you generalize and get surprised that you are being called out.

No emotional reactions. Show me where they are?

I am not upset with anything. That would imply I care what you think.

What I dislike, if we can even call it that, is that you misrepresent intentionally and are falling victim to extremely easy to avoid ego trips like claiming that your anecdotal evidence is universal.

That is not OK and is not intellectually fair.

Be intellectually fair. If you are not then I posit that you don't belong in tech as you have no scientific and analytic approach to things. That's my takeaway here.

You have left an extensive record of your bias in multiple comments. Including purposeful deflection and projection, as you try to make it out that I react emotionally. Which is false.

You seem like a lost cause though. So bye.