sb-simd VS rust-quiz

> fully dynamic

Well, no, it's SBCL. Common Lisp has support for types, but most compilers only use them for optimization, SBCL goes one step further and emits warnings when you mismatch types. And looking at the code, I can see lots of type declarations.

It's also interesting to note that the code does not seem to be using SBCL's new SIMD library*, so it could be sped up even more.

* <https://github.com/marcoheisig/sb-simd>, see the texinfo file for documentation.

I suppose that using arrays + using SIMD instructions could be even faster. Someone is already doing that: https://github.com/marcoheisig/sb-simd/blob/master/examples/simd-dot.lisp .

Common Lisp (sbcl) performance via native implementation of simd [0] is very impressive ! It is litteraly acheieving C/Cpp speeds (within few ms). Great work by Marco Heisig

[0] https://github.com/marcoheisig/sb-simd

Here is another demonstration of how effective SIMD vectorization can be using sb-simd.

You can see on Programming Language and Compiler Benchmark site the amazing speed of SBCL when sb-simd is used for vectorization.

For SBCL-specific, Marco and Bela have put in a ton of work at sb-simd - may be the OP finds the relevant simd interface there!

And sb-simd is getting very-very impressive to say the least thanks to Marco Heisig.

You can use sb-simd for manual vectorisation with SBCL. Manual vectorisation is definitely more hassle than automatic vectorisation, but often worth it.

Fully agreed. One more library that could open up areas is also coming soon. Though documentation is still to be written. Please check sb-simd I wish I could have supported Marco even more.

If you didn't like these because they're "trick" questions you likely also would not enjoy CppQuiz (https://cppquiz.org/)

However you might well enjoy https://dtolnay.github.io/rust-quiz/

Like the C++ quiz, "Undefined Behaviour" is a valid answer, however, the quiz questions are about safe Rust, so that answer is always wrong.

I still get more than half of them wrong unless given far too long to think about it.

Cool, but I feel like the current questions are super basic. Something you're able to answer after reading the book and toying with Rust on a weekend. Definitely needs some harder questions, maybe feel inspired by https://dtolnay.github.io/rust-quiz/?

> If we accept that Rust is indeed more difficult to learn than comparable systems programming languages

My problem is with "comparable systems programming languages". To me the only thing that fits there today is C++ and while a great many programming languages would be easier to learn than Rust, C++ is not one of them by a long shot.

I think the C++ Quiz https://cppquiz.org/ and the Rust Quiz https://dtolnay.github.io/rust-quiz/ illustrate handily. Neither of these languages is a walk in the park, but, notice they both have "Undefined behaviour" as a possible answer? Safe Rust doesn't actually have undefined behaviour, so you get to rule out one of the possibilities any time you don't see the "unsafe" keyword, which is in fact every time on the Rust Quiz. In C++ some of the quiz questions invoke UB, but good luck correctly guessing which ones.

Do you actually want to question all you know about Rust? Do this amazing quiz by the famed dtolnay.

If you want a correct and much harder Rust quiz, here you go.

⭐ Rust Quiz - David Tolnay

One surprise perhaps is that both Python and C++ have multiple inheritance whereas Rust doesn't have implementation inheritance at all (Rust's traits can inherit but data structures and implementations cannot).

Both C++ and Rust have similar Quiz sites:

https://dtolnay.github.io/rust-quiz/

Obligatory: https://dtolnay.github.io/rust-quiz/

There is also this quiz