Programming-Language-Benchmark VS FS2

I found Zig implementation of json parsing is interesting. The code is free from hidden control flow !.

https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

It appears helloworld is the only test with any repeats, and it only has 5 repeats. https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

Here's the measurement code, it appears to be significantly more complicated than a simple fork/exec/wait loop but that could just be all the C# getting in the way: https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark... Nevertheless you are probably right that the bulk of this 1.8ms is in the executable under test, and it truly is just bloat. Running `hyperfine ./empty-main-function` from rustc on my Mac gives 0.8ms.

Is faster... on code that has been optimized to hell and back 5 times over and no longer resembles anything like normal code written in the language.

Seriously, this is the code for the top program. I'm reasonably sure 99% of C++ programmers could not decipher it without spending significant amounts of time on google: https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

I appreciate that fair benchmarks across languages are a hard problem, but this is not a good solution to it. Any reference to this data as a comparison between "programming languages and compilers" needs to come with a giant disclaimer that it's comparing them at something you almost certainly don't use them for, and is very far from their main use case.

I also appreciate that this is a repetitive comment the likes of which always come up when this benchmark is mentioned... but I really don't see another way to avoid people misinterpreting it. Very few people are going to spontaneously click through to the code.

Recently, CE3 has had similar issues reported across multiple repositories, almost an epidemic of reports!

Thanks for the explanation!

So it's pull based and not push based like most other streams lib.

Does maybe someone know how this compares to FS2 or Iteratees than? (Both are also pull based streaming solutions).

https://fs2.io/#/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iteratee

Looks quite similar to me. Is the Scala FS2 lib maybe even a clones of the Haskell solution? Or are they different in important aspects?

Most important/known: * https://http4s.org/ - an HTTP client/server * https://github.com/typelevel/fs2 - streaming * https://github.com/tpolecat/doobie - JDBC

On the contrary, switching to the functional mindset, with something like Typelevel Scala3 and respective cats and cats-effect fs2 frameworks, helps to rethink a lot of designs and development approaches.

fs2 for streaming.

Finally, the last chapter has been rewritten to be based on some of the main design ideas from FS2 (https://fs2.io), which I hope will be more approachable than the 1st edition.

Just to clarify, is your doubt about the meaning of the api, or do you think you have found a bug? In either case, you can also open a Github discussion https://github.com/typelevel/fs2/discussions.

Another more reactive solution would to use signals, as in FPR sinal network. fs2 implements this very nicely here https://github.com/typelevel/fs2/blob/8b285a6b54c63d43ed6aa3bb91365652035c90e5/core/shared/src/main/scala/fs2/concurrent/Signal.scala

Assuming the bug mentioned here is https://github.com/typelevel/fs2/issues/2568, we came up with a partial fix in a day (https://github.com/typelevel/fs2/pull/2569) and a complete fix in 2 days: https://github.com/typelevel/fs2/pull/2572. Note the original bug was opened on a Saturday. :)