MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by IshKebab | 2026-01-14 14:00:23+00:00
I think the only reasonable way to interpret this question is "is Rust written by reasonably competent Rust developer spending a reasonable amount of time faster/slower than an equally competent C developer spending the same amount of time".

I don't think a language should count as "fast" if it takes an expert or an inordinate amount of time to get good performance, because most code won't have that.

So on those grounds I would say Rust probably is faster than C, because it makes it much much easier to use multithreading and more optimised libraries. For example a lot of C code uses linked lists because they're easy to write in C, even when a vector would be faster and more appropriate. Multithreading can just be a one line change in Rust.
by OskarS | 2026-01-14 14:00:58+00:00
I think personally the answer is "basically no", Rust, C and C++ are all the same kind of low-level languages with the same kind of compiler backends and optimizations, any performance thing you could do in one you can basically do in the other two.

However, in the spirit of the question: someone mentioned the stricter aliasing rules, that one does come to mind on Rust's side over C/C++. On the other hand, signed integer overflow being UB would count for C/C++ (in general: all the UB in C/C++ not present in Rust is there for performance reasons).

Another thing I thought of in Rust and C++s favor is generics. For instance, in C, qsort() takes a function pointer for the comparison function, in Rust and C++, the standard library sorting functions are templated on the comparison function. This means it's much easier for the compiler to specialize the sorting function, inline the comparisons and optimize around it. I don't know if C compilers specialize qsort() based on comparison function this way. They might, but it's certainly a lot more to ask of the compiler, and I would argue there are probably many cases like this where C++ and Rust can outperform C because of their much more powerful facilities for specialization.
by esrauch | 2026-01-14 14:01:02+00:00
It's never the case that only one thing is important.

In the extreme, you surely wouldn't accept a 1 day or even 1 week build time for example? It seems like that could be possible and not hypothetical for a 1 week build since a system could fuzz over candidate compilation, and run load tests and do PGO and deliver something better. But even if runtime performance was so important that you had such a system, it's obvious you wouldn't ever have developer cycles that take a week to compile.

Build time also even does matter for release: if you have a critical bug in production and need to ship the fix, a 1 hour build time can still lose you a lot here. Release build time doesn't matter until it does.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-14 14:01:05+00:00
Absolutely, not trying to claim otherwise. But since we're engineers (at least I like to see myself as one), it's worth always keeping in mind that almost everything comes with tradeoffs, even traits :)

Someone down the line might be wondering why suddenly their Rust builds take 4x the time after merging something, and just maybe remembering this offhand comment will make them find the issue faster :)
by hagbard_c | 2026-01-14 14:01:31+00:00
As hencq already mentioned ASML and NXP were spinoffs from Philips, to be specific from the Philips Natuurkundig Laboratorium [1] or NatLab for short. What something like e.g. Bell Labs was for the USA the NatLab was for the Netherlands: an industrial research and development organisation where theoretical research and product development were integrated into the same organisation. Apart from the already mentioned ASML and NXP spinoffs it was also where the Compact Disc [2] was developed.

[1] https://grokipedia.com/page/philips-natuurkundig-laboratoriu...

[2] https://grokipedia.com/page/Compact_disc
by mid-kid | 2026-01-14 14:01:33+00:00
I almost ignored this post because I can't stand this particular war, where examples are cherry picked to prove either answer. A particular language doesn't have a "speed", a particular implementation may have, and the language may have properties that make it difficult to make a fast implementation given the constraints of our current computer architectures. Even then, there's usually too many variables to make a generalized statement, and the question often presumes that performance is measured as total cpu time.

I'm very happy to see the nuanced take in this article, slowly deconstructing the implicit assumptions proposed by the person asking this question, to arrive at the same conclusion that I long have. I hope this post reaches the right people.
by skeeter2020 | 2026-01-14 14:01:36+00:00
this makes sense, but can be at odds with the reason you're there. If your manager is not working to align your personal motivations with those of the organization they are failing. I don't believe it's a spectrum of good-bad management and "level of motivational interference". An "average manager" just does a weak job at the individual-organizational alignment.
by steveklabnik | 2026-01-14 14:03:23+00:00
Rust does have incremental rebuilds, yes.

Folks have worked tirelessly to improve the speed of the Rust compiler, and it's gotten significantly faster over time. However, there are also language-level reasons why it can take longer to compile than other languages, though the initial guess of "because of the safety checks" is not one of them, those are quite fast.

> How slow are we talking here?

It really depends on a large number of factors. I think saying "roughly like C++" isn't totally unfair, though again, it really depends.
by eieio | 2026-01-14 14:03:56+00:00
Ah! Right after submitting 1000 Blank White Cards to HN I thought of Finchley Central[1] which (I think) is the game that Mornington Crescent comes from. I learned about Finchley Central a few years ago while reading about the history of The Game[2] (sorry).

I've had ideas off and on for the last 2 years about how to translate Finchley Central into something you could play over the internet with strangers but I've never quite figured out how to make it work; I think a key aspect of these games is having shared context with your friends and trying to make them laugh.

Anyway, fun that your mind went to the same place!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finchley_Central_(game)
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(mind_game)
by gus_massa | 2026-01-14 14:04:30+00:00
My camera use "$date_$hour.jpg", something like "20251019_133529.jpg"

I probably want to keep the order of the images. Can I use your program to remame them to something like

20251019_133529_yellow_banana.jpg

20251019_134310_dog_with_bone.jpg

20251019_140233_cloud_in_sky.jpg

?
by jillesvangurp | 2026-01-14 14:05:00+00:00
It's compilers and compiler optimizations that make code run fast. The real question is if the Rust language and the richer memory semantics it has help the Rust compiler to provide a bit more context for optimizing that the C compiler wouldn't have do unless you hand optimize your code.

If you do hand optimize your code, all bets are off. With both languages. But I think the notion that the Rust compiler has more context for optimizing than the C compiler is maybe not as controversial as the notion that language X is better/faster than language Y. Ultimately, producing fast/optimal code in C kind of is the whole point of C. And there aren't really any hacks you can do in C that you can't do in Rust, or vice versa. So, it would be hard to make the case that Rust is slower than C or the other way around.

However, there have been a few rewrites of popular unix tools in Rust that benchmark a bit faster than their C equivalents. Could those be optimized in C. Probably; but they just haven't. But there is a case there of arguing that maybe Rust code is a bit easier to make fast than C code.
by podlp | 2026-01-14 14:05:14+00:00
Cool app! It’s quite polished and scrolling is smooth on a 13 Mini. Some quick thoughts:

- I didn’t see any loading indicator, and some videos took multiple seconds to load
- When I scroll up then back down, I get a white gradient at the bottom of the screen that goes away after a few seconds
- I’d like to be able to expand the description text, but clicking it didn’t do anything
- Without signing in, my initial feed was almost entirely ICE videos
by sgeisenh | 2026-01-14 14:05:19+00:00
Yes, for most real-world examples JavaScript is significantly slower; JIT isn’t free and can be very sensitive to small code changes, you also have to consider the garbage collector.

Speed is also not the only metric, Rust and C enable much better control over memory usage. In general, it is easier to write a memory-efficient program in Rust or C than it is in JS.
Show HN: Convert Go to Rust
by KingOfCoders | 2026-01-14 14:05:20+00:00
I announce rinku to the world!

With people looking less and less at code,
why not choose a language with better
runtime characteristics instead of the
one you wanted to write code in before?

As a Go coder I have migrated several of my small tools to
Rust, as Rust is faster, uses less memory and has no
GC latency (wish Go had arenas).

The main obstacle was mapping third party dependencies like open
source libraries.

As a solution I have created 'rinku'. You give it a Go dependency
and it gives you a Rust dependency.

> $ rinku lookup https://github.com/spf13/cobra
> https://github.com/clap-rs/clap

Prompt now becomes (real prompt is more complicated)

> Translate the project from Go to Rust. For dependencies migration use rinku.

The library of mappings is not yet extensive, but
migration is now much easier.

https://github.com/marvai-dev/rinku
by DrScientist | 2026-01-14 14:05:40+00:00
> The rise of anxiety in young people over the last 20 years is well documented

Sure - but I'd argue that's due to the overall unhealthy aspects of internet use and not specifically 'cancel culture'.

The internet has become a constant stream of something that is simultaneously designed to maintain your attention and engagement ( control you ), and sell you stuff ( control you ).
by matwood | 2026-01-14 14:05:44+00:00
> If you liked a song that you later realized was generated would it ruin the song?

This whole discussion reminds me of Milli Vanilli from the 90s. They were hugely popular with a few songs and then people found out it wasn't actually them singing. It was a big scandal and the songs because unpopular instantly. I was always a bit confused by the crash because it's not like the song on the radio changed at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milli_Vanilli
by QuiCasseRien | 2026-01-14 14:06:29+00:00
Guys,

GitHub action is a totally broken piece of s !! I know about that broken loops cause I had to deal with it an incredible number of times.

I very often mention OneDev in my comments, and you know what ? Robin solved this issue 3 years ago : https://docs.onedev.io/tutorials/cicd/diagnose-with-web-term...

You can pause your action, connect through a web terminal, and debug/fix things live until it works. Then, you just patch your action easily.

And that’s just one of the many features that make OneDev superior to pretty much every other CI/CD product out there.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-14 14:06:30+00:00
> Do you use the proprietary github actions stuff?

If I can avoid it, no. Almost everything I can control is outside of the Microsoft ecosystem. But as a freelancer, I have to deal a bunch with GitHub and Microsoft anyways, so in many of those cases, yes.

Many times, I end up using https://github.com/actions/cache for the clients who already use Actions, and none of that runs in the local machines at all.

Typically I use a single Makefile/Justfile, that sometimes have most of the logic inside of it for running tests and what not, sometimes shell out to "proper" scripts.

But that's disconnected from the required "setup", so Make/Just doesn't actually download dependencies, that's outside of the responsibilities of whatever runs the test.

And also, with a lot of languages, it doesn't matter if you run an extra "npm install" over already existing node_modules/, it'll figure out what's missing/there already, so you could in theory still have "make test" do absolute everything locally, including installing dependencies (if you now wish this), and still do the whole "hash > find cache > extract > continue" thing before running "make test", and it'll skip the dependencies part if it's there already.
by DiskoHexyl | 2026-01-14 14:07:16+00:00
With this recent trend of a license-free or even AI-generated music, I doubt that they even have the incentive to give way to those smaller and less popular bands (the well-knowns are going to be just fine anyway) that were the reason I came to music streaming in the first place.

Discovery of a new stuff- the niche, the unknown. Some part-time band from another side of the globe with 10k listens, but whose music is something that makes ME feel.

This didn't really work all that well before streaming came about- record stores in my city were small, and their selection included either the classics, or the current top-10. Friends and radio helped a bit, but not so much with the really obscure pieces or even entire genres.

So on one hand, with self-hosting Navidrome I can't be happier and have actually started discovering the music I've long stince forgotten or just the less popular pieces of the musicians that I already enjoy (because you buy and rip the entire CD, not just the most popular song of the album, and those songs are then being played at random).

The only problem is how to find something new? Do I go to internet radio-stations somewhere? Or to curated playlists? Or maybe there's an open recommendation system somewhere?
by pj4533 | 2026-01-14 14:07:42+00:00
"The genAI has built it" -- this is the core point. If I did nothing except complain about AI for the past 10 months, would these projects exist? No they would not. So. I. Built. It.

If you actually use these tools, really use them. You realize that it's an augmentation not a replacement. Simply because the training data is what has already come before (for now!). The LLMs need help, direction, focus...and those are learned skills dependent on the tooling. Not to mention ideas.

And sure, I imagine the software development workforce will change quite a bit, probably this year, no doubt about that.

But the need for builders will not change. I imagine that the 'builder' role will change to be traditional software developers, designers, sales people, writers, c-suite...whatever.

So I think you are right. "That could easily exclude you or me". 100% correct. The required skill set to be a builder is changing on a weekly basis. The only way to keep up is to keep building with these tools. Trying things. Experimenting. Otherwise, yes, you will probably be replaced. By a builder.
by esrauch | 2026-01-14 14:07:57+00:00
People do have cold Rust compiles that can push up into measured in hours. Large crates often take design choices that are more compile time friendly shape.

Note that C++ also has almost as large problem with compile times with large build fanouts including on templates, and it's not always realistic for incremental builds to solve either especially time burnt on linking, e.g. I believe Chromium development often uses a mode with .dlls dynamic linking instead of what they release which is all static linked exactly to speed up incremental development. The "fast" case is C not C++.
by aurareturn | 2026-01-14 14:08:51+00:00
I think they're also running this at 16 bit quant. If they lower it to 8bit, they might double their output which might come out to be 11 cents per million tokens.

Now take into account that modern LLMs tend to use 4bit inference, and Blackwell is significantly more optimized for 4 bit, we can see much less than 11 cents. Maybe a speed up of 5x if using 4bit and Blackwell vs H100 and 8 bit?

So we're looking at potentially 2.2 cents per million tokens.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-14 14:08:52+00:00
> But personally so far everytime I have come across something not using a task runner it has just been the wrong decision.

Yeah, tends to happen a lot when you hold strong opinions with strong conviction :) Not that it's wrong or anything, but it's highly subjective in the end.

Typically I see larger issues being created from "under-engineering" and just rushing with the first idea people can think of when they implement things, rather than "over-engineering" causing similarly sized future issues. But then I also know everyone's history is vastly different, my views are surely shaped by the specific issues I've witnessed (and sometimes contributed to :| ), than anything else.
by mattmaroon | 2026-01-14 14:09:03+00:00
It is wild. I must admit I have a bit of Gell Mann amnesia when it comes to HN comments. I often check them to see what people think about an article, but then every time the article touches on something I know deeply, I realize it’s all just know-it-all puffery. Then I forget and check it when it’s on the many things I do not know much about.

My cofounder is extremely technically competent, but all these people are like good luck with your spaghetti vibe code. It’s humorous.
by dathinab | 2026-01-14 14:09:07+00:00
> Do the actually do this, or do they just say they do this?

they do it within limits

- you trick it into generating actual naked people (instead of bikini pictures or sexualized poses etc.)

- it blows up (bad press, a lot of abuse reports)

which means effectively for most of this pictures there are no consequences

heck Elon has personally argued they fall under free speech and nothing need to be changed.... (but in EU, UK, and large parts of the world they don't. Also in a round about way free speech probably doesn't apply to it in the US either: because speech needs a speaker which is a person (natural or legal) and AI doesn't count as a person (and hence can by itself not hold copyright either)).
by skeeter2020 | 2026-01-14 14:09:37+00:00
>> highly collaborative teams as opposed to those who prefer to be 10x lone wolves

I was a decent developer and a much better manager, and I think a big part of it was I learned these are different games. By the time we hit multiple dev teams I had good success framing it wtih senior ICs like this: "If you want to get 10% better (better in context of what they are defining) this year, that's really, really hard. But it would be easy for you to make everyone on the team 2-3% better, and our net improvement would be well over 10%." We then talk & plan relatively straight-forward ways to make this happen, and mix in explicit personal improvement/growth components. They're motivated, they make their teammates motivated, they make me motivated. Meanwhile the 10x'er (not sure I've had one of those) keeps grinding it out in the minor leagues.
by bbor | 2026-01-14 14:10:20+00:00
...ok I guess I grant that technically the leader of the board is not the board itself, but that feels a bit pedantic. A prime minister/speaker of the house/etc. isn't the unitary executive of that chamber wielding absolute power, but they are still obviously the leader.

I assume you have more experience than me in corporate governance, but this is such a fundamental truth that I've just gotta stick to my guns. The executives serve at the pleasure of the board. That's what the board is.

Also, like, do you know anything about Dawn? She’s been serving the Python community waaaay longer than she’s worked for Microsoft. Questioning her ethics based on absolutely nothing is unfounded and, honestly, pretty fucked up.

Well, besides the compliments I paid her above, no I do not. I don't think you're right to be offended at the implication that anyone could be coerced into putting their 6-figure job ahead of the non-profit they serve in the right circumstances, but TBH the worry of unconscious bias is just as real and doesn't require any ethical breaches.

There’s this pernicious lie that Microsoft is somehow controlling the PSF. It’s based on about as much evidence as there is for Flat Earth, yet here it is again.

As I said above: I don't think there's evidence of any significant conflicts of interest so far, either from Microsoft, Anaconda, or any other firm. That said, I hope I can at least convince you that comparing concerns about corruption to a belief in a trivially-false scientific claim is going too far:

The fact of the matter is that the senior-most member of an important non-profit was/is employed in a lucrative, full-time, relatively open-ended role by a firm whose profits depend directly on the work of that non-profit. There's no accusations in that statement, and thus no room for it to be written off as a conspiracy theory.

In terms of why it matters: wouldn't it at least deserve a raised eyebrow if, say...

- The chair of the WHO was employed by J&J?

- The chair of the ACLU was employed by a political party?

- The chair of Make-A-Wish was employed by a Hollywood agency?
by Larrikin | 2026-01-14 14:10:48+00:00
Nearly half of my aunts and uncles saw Martin Luther King Jr speak live on TV.

Donald Trump was in college when active discrimination by the government became illegal.

Do you think that after Jim Crow was dismantled in the 60s, that all of those people who were against it, that you see in the video footage and photos violently protesting it, suddenly disappeared?
by yccs27 | 2026-01-14 14:11:18+00:00
The saying probably assumes that each chronometer has a certain small probability of malfunctioning, resulting in a significant error (basically a fat-tailed error distribution). With three chronometers, you can use a robust estimator of the true value (consensus value or median). With two, there's no robust estimator and if you use the mean, you have twice the probability of being significantly wrong (though only by half as much).
by bluGill | 2026-01-14 14:11:42+00:00
Only if it is repeatable. We have no information on what they learned in the two failed attempts - it is likely that they learned from the failures and started other architectural changes that enabled the final one to work. As such we cannot say anything about this.

Rust does have some interesting features, which restrict what you are allowed to do and thus make some things impossible but in turn make other things easier. It is highly likely that those restrictions are part of what made this possible. Given infinite resources (which you never have) a C++ implementation could be faster because it has better shared data concepts - but those same shared data concepts make it extremely hard to reason about multi-threaded code and so humanly you might not be able to make it work.
by AnimalMuppet | 2026-01-14 14:12:08+00:00
I think there's a third question, but I don't know quite how to phrase it. Maybe "how real-world fast is the language?" or "how fast is the language in the hands of someone who isn't obsessively thinking about speed?"

That is, most of the time, most of the users aren't thinking about how to squeeze the last tenth of a percent of speed out of it. They aren't thinking about speed at all. They're thinking about writing code that works at all, and that hopefully doesn't crash too often. How fast is the language for them? Does it nudge them toward faster code, or slower? Are the default, idiomatic ways of writing things the fast way, or the slow way?
by jmuguy | 2026-01-14 14:12:17+00:00
I came so close to getting our app off of Google Maps a few months ago, we'd be saving literally thousands a month. But the "look" of the map from open street map, map tiler, etc was deemed too different and the team was scared it would negatively impact our users. The Maps API is definitely getting worse, and the pricing setup seems like it was cooked up by someone from Microsoft. Also Maplibre and its various wrappers are so much nicer to work it.