"Clean" Code, Horrible Performance in Rust (chrs.dev)

submitted 2 months ago by chrs@programming.dev to c/rust@programming.dev

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Turun@feddit.de 7 points 2 months ago

It would be interesting to see if an iterator instead of a manual for loop would increase the performance of the base case.

My guess is not, because the compiler should know they are equivalent, but would be interesting to check anyway.

[-] Deebster@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago

I wonder if the compiler checks to see if the calls are pure and are therefore safe to run in parallel. It seems like the kind of thing the Rust compiler should be able to do.

[-] TehPers@beehaw.org 5 points 2 months ago

If by parallel you mean across multiple threads in some map-reduce algorithm, the compiler will not do that automatically since that would be both extremely surprising behavior and in most cases, would make performance worse (it'd be interesting to see just how many shapes you'd need to iterate over before you start seeing performance benefits from map-reduce). If you're referring to vectorization, then the Rust compiler does automatically do that in some cases, and I imagine it depends on how the area is calculated and whether the implementation can be inlined.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Do you mean this for loop?

for shape in &shapes {
  accum += shape.area();
}

That does use an iterator

for-in-loops, or to be more precise, iterator loops, are a simple syntactic sugar over a common practice within Rust, which is to loop over anything that implements IntoIterator until the iterator returned by .into_iter() returns None (or the loop body uses break).

Anti Commercial AI thingy

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] arendjr@programming.dev 9 points 2 months ago

I think they meant using for accumulating, like this:

shapes.iter().map(Shape::area).sum()

[-] Turun@feddit.de 4 points 2 months ago

Yes. That's what I meant.

Though I heavily expect the rust compiler to produce identical assembly for both types of iteration.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago

Oh, I see. That would be interesting to benchmark too 👍

Anti Commercial AI thingy

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Anti Commercial AI thingy

Off-topic, but does that actually work? I would assume OpenAI would just ignore it and you'd have to prove that they did so.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 5 points 2 months ago

Dunno if it works. AI has been tricked into revealing it's training data, so it's possible that it happens and they are sued for using copyrighted material.

This is my drop in the ocean.

Anti Commercial AI thingy

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Maybe I'll join you. :)

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago

Welcome 🙂 A drop more.

Btw, if you're using linux and X11, you can bind a keyboard shortcut to the following shell-script (probably will need to install xte).

#!/usr/bin/env bash
sleep 0.5
xte "str Anti Commercial AI thingy"xte "key Return"
xte "str [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)"
xte "key Return"
xte "str "

Anti Commercial AI thingy

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0