Firefox 68 Integrates BigInt Support

[pkese]

Firefox runs slower than Chrome/Chromium.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-73-Benchmarks
Rust and other bad choices slows down.

What makes you think that Rust is the problem?

I'm not a Rust programmer, I used to program C++ but I can see many cases where it is easier to extract some extra performance out of Rust than C++. For example the OOP approach in C++ includes virtual methods which include a small performance penalty due to need of dereferencing each time such methods are called. Similarly Rust makes it easier to avoid some memory allocations. Then there are cases where one'd normally use ARC pointers in C++ (with extra cost of managing reference count at each use) in cases where one could rely on Rust's borrow checker to safely program many of these pointer usages without reference counting altogether.

To me it appears that Rust really enables better ratio of level of abstratcions divided by cost of abstractions than C++.
But I might be wrong... as I said I don't know Rust as well as C++...

What's your experience with Rust?

[pkese]

C/C++ beats rust in real world applications.
https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.de...-are-fast.html

What's that: the link that you provided exactly falsifies your claims - it not only shows that Rust is faster than C++, but also that Rust's results are more consistent than both C and C++.

Can you now provide a link that supports your claims?

[LightBit]

Rust and other bad choices slows down.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/rust.html

[blackshard]

Firefox runs slower than Chrome/Chromium.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Firefox-66-Chrome-73-Benchmarks

Rust and other bad choices slows down.

You can join the project and propose your alternative and faster/safer/better solutions.

[programmerjake]

Obviously... why do you seem to think you're telling me something I don't know? The only reason I pointed out what I did was RealNC's response was rather incomplete/unclear.

additional elaboration for the benefit of others. It's obvious that you already know about BigInt, didn't mean to offend.

[cb88]

BigInt supports arbitrary-precision integers, so it can correctly do arithmetic on a 7000-digit number if you wanted.

So, for example, if you wanted to calculate 3 ** 50 % 81, you could do that using BigInt: 3n ** 50n % 81n == 0n (since 3 ** 50 is a multiple of 3 ** 4 or 81).
If you tried that using standard JavaScript numbers, it would give the wrong answer due to rounding: 3 ** 50 % 81 == 42

Obviously... why do you seem to think you're telling me something I don't know? The only reason I pointed out what I did was RealNC's response was rather incomplete/unclear.

[programmerjake]

Larger than 2^52.. JS can already handle numbers up to 2^53.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/BigInt

BigInt supports arbitrary-precision integers, so it can correctly do arithmetic on a 7000-digit number if you wanted.

So, for example, if you wanted to calculate 3 ** 50 % 81, you could do that using BigInt: 3n ** 50n % 81n == 0n (since 3 ** 50 is a multiple of 3 ** 4 or 81).
If you tried that using standard JavaScript numbers, it would give the wrong answer due to rounding: 3 ** 50 % 81 == 42

[andyprough]

I turned on webrender on Firefox Nightly 69.0a1 tonight. Playing videos caused the CPU usage to basically double. I couldn't see any discernible difference in playback, so I turned it back off.

[pracedru]

Finally
this should have been done 10 years ago.

[cb88]

Eh, no. More like 2^53.

Larger than 2^53.. JS can already handle numbers up to 2^53.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/...Objects/BigInt