I saw that but I was interested to know if TFA had decided to go with it because it looks better on paper or if it's because they hit a roadblock using the std counterparts and migrated to using those.
That being said since they're drop-in replacements for the most part I suppose I could just try to rebuild my project with this crate and see if I notice a difference performance-wise.
In our case, it wasn't a matter of hitting a specific roadblock as much as it was past experience in performance-sensitive projects, and knowing that if we start with those crates we'll probably be fine, and if we don't, we'll probably switch to them eventually for some reason.
With crossbeam for example, you can hit roadblocks with std since their channels are MPSC, whereas crossbeam supports MPMC channels (and is faster than std in every meaningful measurement last I checked).
Reading the description it almost seemed too good to be true but if it's indeed objectively better in basically every situation I should probably give it a try.
What's wrong with learning a new technology on the job?
Rust leaves a lot of improvements to its standard library to the community, so these improvements start off as separate libraries for faster iteration. The most recent example I remember is the hashbrown crate replacing the standard HashMap.
That being said since they're drop-in replacements for the most part I suppose I could just try to rebuild my project with this crate and see if I notice a difference performance-wise.