Will there be performance and security improvements?

  • Killercat103@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Performance? Not really no. I believe C is slightly faster with Rust and C++ competing for second place. The benefit is safer code as Rust is built with performance and safety in mind. It highlights what potential errors can be found where making human error way less common. Instead of potential null errors types are wrapped in an option enumerator which ensures you know there can be a lack of a value. Expections are also enumerators done similarly with a result object so you know which functions may fail. Instead of using memory and potentially forgetting to free it we have the ownership system.

    • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      How is C faster than C++? Unless you use virtual functions, it’s as performant as C. And you definitely wouldn’t use virtual functions in a kernel.

      • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The use of basic classes can very quickly become a performance issue because of data locality issues, confusing the branch predictor, and generally using instructions where C wouldn’t need to.

        They’re honestly insignificant compared to the value you get in return, especially with the better typing and application design, but they’re there.

        If you stick to the builtin classes, no capturing lambdas, don’t use too many generics, and use const often enough, you should be able to produce code that’s as fast as C. At that point you may as well use C, though, especially because one mistake with semantics and you’re back to hitting C++ related performance issues anyway.

      • Anti-Antidote@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        C++ is only as fast as C if you use only the parts of C++ that are identical to C. In other words, C is faster than C++

          • PuppyOSAndCoffee@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Compile time has got to be part of the convo esp when it comes to the kernel. The Linux kernel is one of the few bits where end-users are actively encouraged to compile from source. It is a feature!

            Adding C++ compilitis is pain for what gain, from a kernel pov.

            I am not a big fan of c++ overall however that is because other languages have emerged that are sweeter than C that gate some of the people issues with C++.

            Anyone who has ever had a thing that was like a thing but not exactly the thing, in C, knows C ain’t great at that.

            • cmeerw@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              The description says:

              In this video, we’ll do a deep dive on what C++ Polymorphism is, what “virtual” does under the hood, and ultimately why it is SUCH a performance hit compared to languages like C and Rust.

              This is not about compile-time polymorphism.