Where Does the Performance Go? Understanding and Recovering Performance Regressions in C-to-Rust Translation
Rust is increasingly adopted as a memory-safe successor to C, and transpilers such as \crust{} can migrate entire C projects while preserving their behavior. Preserving behavior, however, does not guarantee preserving performance. We study this gap on 20 real-world C projects and their \crust{} translations. On the eight projects used for analysis, the translated Rust is more than 3\% slower than the original C on 12 of 19 operations, by up to 62.2\%. By comparing execution-cost profiles, optimized LLVM IR, and compiler optimization remarks across each C--Rust pair, we trace these slowdowns to nine recurring performance issues, spanning residual runtime work, missed compiler optimizations...
| Authors | Zhiqiang Yuan, Chong Wang, Zhenhao Zhou et al. |
|---|---|
| Primary category | cs.AI |
| Published | 16 October 2026 |
| Last updated at source | 16 October 2026 |
Popularity, last 5 days
0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.
Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 23 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.