If Haiku was written in Rust over C++, would there be a huge difference in terms of performance wise or not?
I think that answer is ‘no’.
…If you want to have more efficient binary you must use lower level programing language such as C or Assembler and work hard on optimizing your source code. As I know.
Where stands that haiku is written in rust? Where did people get infos like this from? Please first inform, then asking please.
Haiku is written in c ++ and we have 3rd party QT apps running
“Performance of idiomatic Rust is comparable to the performance of idiomatic C++.”
— from Wikipedia
He said: “If Haiku was written”
— this is only probability, not a fact.
yes, but somewhere he must have it so that it could be so. Or is there nothing left today without rust?
Seems that (some) people are fascinated by Rust these days.
…If someone asked me about better language for writing Operating System, I would say that it can be D programming language, successor of C++ (as some people think).
Is there can be some point in rewritting Haiku in D language? I wonder.
“If Haiku was written in Rust [instead of] C++…” is the propositional case. It asks that we form a hypothesis, based on a state-of-the-world which does not exist. So, the original question is: Would Haiku have huge performance difference if all code became Rust instead of C++?
The answer to the question is best left as an exercise for the reader. (-:
From what I have heard, I thought C++ can go as low as C as well if you were to avoid its automated features?
I am asking if Haiku was written in Rust instead of C++ would there be a difference in its performance?
Isn’t D slower than C++?
Look, let’s just rewrite Haiku in YAB and be done with it. Then we need to compare it against the BrainF version, by running GLTeapot in both versions and see which one has the faster fps… er, tps (Teapots Per Second).
Are you afraid to say “BrainFuck”?
As a born-again Christian, I eschew “corrupt communication” wherever and whenever possible. It’s not in my nature to use vulgarity around others, for any reason. The closest I get is “implying” the word, in certain circumstances.
If you see (!!!), fill in as you wish.
Fair enough mate.
Never programmed in Rust, but performance should be on pair with C++.
In my opinion, what is much more important is development speed.
Many bugs in C++ can be completely eliminated if using Rust, so developers could use much more time to go forward instead of going sideways.
I wish there was a good text editor that detected any memory leak bugs for example.
Apologies for re-opening this thread, but I do enjoy these somewhat speculative discussions!
The reason being that I have recently heard about another language - Crystal - which claims to create code as fast as “C” but is as easy to use as Ruby. A recent review of it is here and implies it is suitable for low-level systems programming “such as daemons and obtuse Kernels”. I wonder what - if any - benefits it might bring to Haiku?
“D” certainly seems to be the most popular contender amongst this forum, should it be necessary to have a “drop-in” replacement to C++. There was a bit of discussion on the relative merits of “D” in this thread.