When you get sufficiently close to the metal, the performance gains seem to be coming from better algorithms rather than from the programming language. Like you are saying:
> The reasons for these gaps can include things like it being harder to use the optimal data structure for your application (eg C code using red-black trees instead of btrees in 2023)
Bryan Cantrill described this experience[1] and maybe that is exactly what you are referring to.
But if you're just looking for a language to get work done with, does it matter if Rust is faster because of better off-the-shelf data structures and algorithms or because of some inherent magic in the programming language?
Yes, because my current alternative (modern C++ with Folly/Absl) provides those data structures already, so there's no real benefit to using the new thing.
That's great for you! Then stick with your current setup.
I don't already know C++. For me, learning Rust is easier than learning safe C++. I imagine that there are many people in a similar situation for whom Rust makes more sense than C++. That doesn't mean that it makes more sense for everyone.
> The reasons for these gaps can include things like it being harder to use the optimal data structure for your application (eg C code using red-black trees instead of btrees in 2023)
Bryan Cantrill described this experience[1] and maybe that is exactly what you are referring to.
But if you're just looking for a language to get work done with, does it matter if Rust is faster because of better off-the-shelf data structures and algorithms or because of some inherent magic in the programming language?
[1] See point 9 here: http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2018/09/18/falling-in-love-with-...