tree-buf
An experimental serialization system written in Rust (by That3Percent)
bytecheck
Memory validation framework for Rust (by rkyv)
tree-buf | bytecheck | |
---|---|---|
3 | 2 | |
252 | 58 | |
- | - | |
0.0 | 6.5 | |
about 1 year ago | 27 days ago | |
Rust | Rust | |
MIT License | MIT License |
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
tree-buf
Posts with mentions or reviews of tree-buf.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2021-03-11.
-
rkyv is faster than {bincode, capnp, cbor, flatbuffers, postcard, prost, serde_json}
I think this is great. Could you add tree-buf as well to your benchmarks?
-
Introducing the Firestorm profiler
I should probably write some examples. If you need some right now you can see instrumenting in https://github.com/That3Percent/tree-buf and profiling in https://github.com/That3Percent/tree-buf-benches. Those haven't been updated to use the latest version of Firestorm yet though.
-
Blog post: (I want) A Better Rust Profiler
First, it's extremely low overhead. I created it for TreeBuf after finding that the existing intrusive profilers available were introducing so much overhead and noise into the result as to make the output flamegraphs meaningless. When you're working on code that is supposed to be the fastest in it's class, you need a profiler with the same ideals.
bytecheck
Posts with mentions or reviews of bytecheck.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2021-03-11.
-
rkyv is faster than {bincode, capnp, cbor, flatbuffers, postcard, prost, serde_json}
rkyv supports validation through bytecheck, which can guarantee that the archive you open is safe. It should only really be necessary to validate an archive if you really can't be sure that it's valid. There's a safe version of archived_value that does this validation, check_archive.
What are some alternatives?
When comparing tree-buf and bytecheck you can also consider the following projects:
rkyv - Zero-copy deserialization framework for Rust
rust-serialization-benchmarks
tracy - Frame profiler
unsafe-code-guidelines - Forum for discussion about what unsafe code can and can't do
rust_serialization_benchmark - Benchmarks for rust serialization frameworks
iai - Experimental one-shot benchmarking/profiling harness for Rust
nachricht - A self-describing data interchange format
hotspot - The Linux perf GUI for performance analysis.
firestorm - A fast intrusive flamegraph
tree-buf vs rkyv
bytecheck vs rust-serialization-benchmarks
tree-buf vs tracy
bytecheck vs unsafe-code-guidelines
tree-buf vs rust-serialization-benchmarks
bytecheck vs rust_serialization_benchmark
tree-buf vs iai
bytecheck vs nachricht
tree-buf vs hotspot
bytecheck vs rkyv
tree-buf vs rust_serialization_benchmark
tree-buf vs firestorm