I think this long post is saying that if you are afraid that moving code behind a function call will slow it down, you can look at the machine code and run a benchmark to convince yourself that it is fine?

We have been able to automatically inline functions for a few decades now. You can even override inlining decisions manually, though that's usually a bad idea unless you're carefully profiling.

Also, it's pointer indirection in data structures that kills you, because uncached memory is brutally slow. Function calls to functions in the cache are normally a much smaller concern except for tiny functions in very hot loops.

Also to note that the inline directive is optional and the compiler can decide to ignore it (even if you put always if I remember)

I wouldn't have agreed with you a year ago. async traits that were built with boxes had real implications on the memory. But, by design the async abstraction that rust provides is pretty good!

A function call is not necessarily an indirection. Basic premise of the blog is wrong on its face.

Cool article but I got turned off by the obvious AI-isms which, because of my limited experience with Rust, has me wondering how true any of the article actually is.