I am really getting annoyed of the ‘@rustlang features are zero cost’ crowd. They are zero cost when used without a runtime. So yes technically they are but technically falling out of a plain gas zero impact on your health ... hitting the ground does. It’s so dishonest...
-
-
The issue is less the cost of the zero cost abstraction (while I do find that bad marketing, I can’t think of a better less misleading wording either), the issue is that the actual cost, namely the runtime scheduling exists and is not zero cost by any definition.
-
Rust futures are not zero cost at runtime (poll is recursive and basically can't model anything with significant complexity because it gets so deep so fast), and I very frequently code abstractions that meet my own async needs with way lower I-cache pollution and mental overhead
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yes. And that's the problem, both interpretations are false and rust shouldn't claim zero cost anything was Heinz's point...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.