3 ms·
What is the difference between "performant" and "fast"? If we were talking about cars, then I would say performance includes not only speed but all kinds of th
by adrianratnapala 10y ago
What is the difference between "performant" and "fast"?
If we were talking about cars, then I would say performance includes not only speed but all kinds of things to do with handling. But in computing it always seems to mean "speed"[1], and "performant" always seems to be a bizarre neologism for "fast".
I think people invented it because speed is a many faceted thing. There is latency, there is thoughput, there is user-visible responsiveness, all at multiple interacting levels. But these complexities and vaguenesses apply equally to the quasi-word "performant".
[1] Actually the main article is a partial exception as she inconsistently includes stability within "performance". In one sentence she says "...performance degradation, including crashes, and the unbounded use of resources." But later she says "Code that doesn’t perform, or that crashes."
- TickleSteve 10y agofast == absolute. performant == relative (efficient on the hardware available). e.g. an algorithm may be performant on a little Cortex-M but certainly is not fast compared to the same code on an I7.
- adrianratnapala 10y agoThe problem with this definition is that it isn't true. 17km/hour is an absolute speed. It is fast for a runner, OK for a cyclist and slow for a car. "Fast" is relative.
- TickleSteve 10y agoI agree in that context.... but in the context the original sentence was used, the statement stands. English is not the most precise language....