4 comments

  • binhex 43 minutes ago
    > but because we have this data (file name, etc.) passed back and forth between different layers in the code. we were doing lots of .clone() and db.open() at different layers to fetch the same data. The interesting part for me was that, this change reduced our

    Reduced your what? The article seems to be cut off.

    • suriya-ganesh 1 minute ago
      ah! sorry. I meant to say, "the interesting part for me was that we removed code to improve performance."
    • taeric 34 minutes ago
      I'm assuming it was going to say lines of code. It is highlighting that more was deleted than added.
      • larpingscholar 7 minutes ago
        I agree. Though the line count is meaningless as the vibe coded diff has pointless formatting and whitespace changes.
  • pointlessone 19 minutes ago
    This is extremely sparse on details.
    • koakuma-chan 11 minutes ago
      It feels like a rage bait. It's clearly their own fault and has nothing to do with Rust.
      • LAC-Tech 8 minutes ago
        maybe Rustaceans shouldn't rage so easily?
  • LAC-Tech 8 minutes ago
    I wonder to what extent the complexity of the rust language hurts performance. We all only have so much mental capacity, if much of it is spent on the various different intersections of rust's features, that reduces how much we can spend on making things fast.

    (I like Rust btw)

  • kykat 10 minutes ago
    algorithm design and managing memory is something you have to think about regardless of what language you use, that should be obvious. Using rust doesn't guarantee correctness or performance, that should also be obvious.

    Rust has features that make it easier to make correct and performant software, I think most programmers would agree?

    Please stop this rust clickbait nonsense.