# Julia stability vs Rust for Scientific Computing

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094>\
**Category:** Optimization (Mathematical)\
**Tags:** question\
**Created:** [May 12, 2026, 11:59pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094 "2026-05-12T23:59:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ZuseZ4](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/zusez4/32/49755_2.png) [@ZuseZ4](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ZuseZ4)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2026, 5:23am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094/41 "2026-06-05T05:23:17Z")

</div>

With respect to GPU programming, we have `std::offload` for vendor-agnostic GPU programming under development, as well as a few out-of-tree solutions (Cutile-rs and oxide-cuda from nvidia), rust-cuda and rust-gpu (spirv), and in-tree amd+nvidia gpu targets (intel is under development). We’ve benchmarked offload on RajaPerf, and got the same memory consumption and runtime as cuda implementations. Obviously, none of these solutions is nearly as mature as KA.jl or some of the other nice Julia equivalents.

With respect to language stability, Rust has Editions and crater as two very helpful features. We can deprecate/remove/fix some of our past mistakes via editions without breaking user code. We also use [GitHub - rust-lang/crater: Run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem! · GitHub](https://github.com/rust-lang/crater) to test a possibly breaking PR (as well as releases, I’d guess) by compiling every test on every crate that was published on our package manager. If a bugfix to rustc breaks existing crates, then compiler devs will usually reach out to the package maintainers and work on a fix before the PR hits the next stable release. We also have an extensive compile-time, and a small runtime benchmark suite, that we run on every pr that gets merged into rustc. Anything regressing either tends to be directly reverted, unless it’s well motivated. We also have a weekly performance triage to notice performance changes over a larger window: [rustc-perf/triage/2026/2026-06-01.md at 4a082d37cfd5006c8313e55bab306ea41f091714 · Kobzol/rustc-perf · GitHub](https://github.com/Kobzol/rustc-perf/blob/4a082d37cfd5006c8313e55bab306ea41f091714/triage/2026/2026-06-01.md)  
I am not sure, though, how helpful or doable such solutions would be for julia development.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![yolhan\_mannes](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/yolhan_mannes/32/220485_2.png) [@yolhan\_mannes](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/yolhan_mannes)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2026, 6:04am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094/42 "2026-06-05T06:04:55Z")

</div>

I think something like Edition is coming in Julia 1.14 with [Provide mechanism for Julia syntax evolution · Pull Request #60018 · JuliaLang/julia](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/60018), although it is not exactly the same thing and won’t be resolved by the compiler easily. As for Crater, I think [GitHub - JuliaCI/NanosoldierReports: A repository for human-readable reports generated by the Nanosoldier.jl CI system. · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaCI/NanosoldierReports) already helps a lot, since it is run on any PR that changes something likely to break packages. Of course, there is still a lot of inspiration that can be taken from one language to another.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [August 9, 2026, 1:56pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094/43 "2026-08-09T13:56:09Z")

</div>

Apologies for reviving this thread, but if you’re still around here @gunner, I’d love to hear where your thinking ended up, i.e. if you ended up using julia or not, and what things you found convincing or unconvincing.

If you ended up using Rust or another tool, I’d also love to hear about that, and what you like or didn’t like.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tamas\_Papp](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/tamas_papp/32/25949_2.png) [@Tamas\_Papp](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Tamas_Papp)\
**Post date:** [August 10, 2026, 12:33pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094/44 "2026-08-10T12:33:08Z")

</div>

I am also interested in this, but note that this timespan may not be sufficient to answer the original question from the perspective of firsthand experience. Almost all languages are stable enough within a year or so.

[Previous page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-stability-vs-rust-for-scientific-computing/137094.md?page=2)