3 ms·
Here's a benchmark that includes an energy comparison: https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/ https://thenewstack.io/whic
by flukus 7y ago
Here's a benchmark that includes an energy comparison: https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/ https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-l... . It's interesting that speed does not directly correlate with energy consumption and the the energy consumption of functional languages was much higher than imperative.
- CoolGuySteve 7y agoNot sure why you’re getting downvoted when you’re the only response with actual data whereas the other responses are defending clearly less efficient practices with gobbledegook about O(1) memory algorithms and whatnot. I think most of it is coming from overly defensive users of GC languages . Sometime the world you want is not the world that exists.
- xfer 7y ago> Specifically, they used 10 problems from the Computer Language Benchmarks Game Yeah some "actual data" right there.
- CoolGuySteve 7y agoIf you have a better Rosetta Stone of computer languages I’d like to see it.
- xfer 7y agowell i am not using questionable data and calling it as an evidence of my beliefs.
- Symmetry 7y agoThat's more a measure of indirection than of garbage collection.
- flukus 7y agoI don't disagree, but that indirection is necessary for the garbage collector, even ref counters usually add levels of indirection.