General notes: 
- Semicolons inconsistent usage makes Rust harder to process. Is that semicolon extra? Is it not? Will that be a compilation error? Saving single keystrokes will be paid in cognitive load. Programming is already a demanding task, this isn&#x27;t helping.
- Chaining multiple statements on a single line is bad for various reasons.<p>Dependencies &#x2F; headers &#x2F; modules:
- C++ is better precisely because it&#x27;s more grained on the initialization side. The paragraph starting  with &#x27;Rust wins, here&#x27;, is just a general turnoff to read the rest of the article.
When I read the title &#x27;Rust vs. C++: Fine-grained performance&#x27; I was honestly expecting either a table with performance times across various algorithms, or a savvy optimization guide. 
I wasn&#x27;t expecting a LoC duke-it-out.<p>Input file processing 
- Both are conceptually boilerplate code. There is more for Rust apparently. 
- There is an interesting &amp;⊛env:: in there that makes the language looks like it needs a bit more work. Three operators just to do something with the first object?
- Are they intentionally trying to copy C++ with the :: operator but removing visually arbitrary semicolons? Just replace the :: with something else.<p>Data structure and input setup
- Remove the &#x27;let&#x27; from the language, and it does look cleaner than the C++.<p>Input state machine
- Why isn&#x27;t &quot;(0..7).rev()&quot; &quot;(7..0)&quot;
- On the bottom part, lamba-like usage will makes in less comprehensible (and probably undebuggable the way it&#x27;s written)<p>General lack of performance numbers
- <i>&quot;I found that iterating over an array with (e.g.) “array.iter()” was much faster than with “&amp;array”, although it should be the same...&quot;
&quot;Curiously, changing scores to an array of 16-bit values slowed down (earlier versions of) the C++ program by quite a large amount – almost 10% in some tests – as the compiler yields to temptation and forces scores into an XMM register. The Rust program was also affected, but less so.&quot;</i><p>Edit: Unicode