6 ms·

One thing people overlook with interpreted languages is the environmental impact in terms of extra electricity used.

by fnord77 7y ago

pts_ 7y ago
Gosh yes. These slow languages offload thinking to burning fossil fuels. INEFFICIENT.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Tell that to accounting that is paying for AWS instance usage. Facebook has an interesting talk about how much electricity 1% performance improvement saves.
  - Daishiman 7y ago
    You're not Facebook. The carbon footprint of a single developer is comparatively gigantic for the vast majority of projects most people work on.
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      If it is running on its own computer, for shell scripting. If it is trying to process ML data, or running in some cloud provider, or deployed in some IoT device supposed to run for years without maintenance, then maybe yes.
      - Daishiman 7y ago
        Right, but when you're at that point in performance considerations you already have a team of specialists working on multiple angles in performance. And precisely, for ML code all python libraries run extremely optimized natively compiled code. The language overhead is a minimal consideration. And for business domain code language performance is rarely the limiting factor.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        In some companies that team size is a very tiny number of 1.
        Daishiman 7y ago
        If your team size is 1 then you're not doing yourself any favor thinking about performance beyond basic usability when dev productivity is a far higher priority.
  - goto11 7y ago
    > Tell that to accounting Are you suggesting that accounting only cares about the AWS bill but not at all about the salary of developers?
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      A developer using an AOT compiled language can still earn the same salary.
      - goto11 7y ago
        Not all languages are equally productive though.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        Plenty of languages are as productive as Python while compiling to native code out of the box, without extra tooling. Includig a couple that are as dynamic as Python.
        pleasecalllater 7y ago
        Examples, please.
advanceduser 7y ago
You're gonna flip when you hear about the environmental impact of a developer.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  just imagine using python of cryptocurrency mining.
  - SEJeff 7y ago
    Or javascript in the browser via malicious js files from hacked ad sites!
geofft 7y ago
What is that impact, quantitatively?
- yawaramin 7y ago
  See https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-l...
  - geofft 7y ago
    Thanks, that definitely looks like useful data as a starting point. 1. What is the impact of a continuous long-running process? That is, if instead of trying to calculate a result and then shut down, I'm running a web server 24/7, what's the impact of an interpreted language over a compiled language? (Assume requests are few and I'm happy with performance with either.) This not models web servers but things like data science workloads where one wants to conduct as much research as possible, so a faster language will just encourage a researcher to submit more jobs. 2. According to https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-ca... , 1 megawatt-hour of fossil fuels is 1559 pounds of carbon dioxide. The site you link calculates an excess of 2245 joules for running their test programs, which is approximately .001 pounds of carbon dioxide, or roughly what a human exhales in half a minute. (Put another way, if using the interpreted language saved even one minute of developer time, it was a net win for the carbon emissions of the program.)
    - edflsafoiewq 7y ago
      > Put another way, if using the interpreted language saved even one minute of developer time, it was a net win for the carbon emissions of the program Developers continue breathing even when they aren't programming.
      - CameronNemo 7y ago
        I do not believe that was ever in question.

One thing people overlook with interpreted languages is the environmental impact in terms of extra electricity used.

pts_ 7y ago

Gosh yes. These slow languages offload thinking to burning fossil fuels. INEFFICIENT.

pjmlp 7y ago
Tell that to accounting that is paying for AWS instance usage. Facebook has an interesting talk about how much electricity 1% performance improvement saves.
- Daishiman 7y ago
  You're not Facebook. The carbon footprint of a single developer is comparatively gigantic for the vast majority of projects most people work on.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    If it is running on its own computer, for shell scripting. If it is trying to process ML data, or running in some cloud provider, or deployed in some IoT device supposed to run for years without maintenance, then maybe yes.
    - Daishiman 7y ago
      Right, but when you're at that point in performance considerations you already have a team of specialists working on multiple angles in performance. And precisely, for ML code all python libraries run extremely optimized natively compiled code. The language overhead is a minimal consideration. And for business domain code language performance is rarely the limiting factor.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        In some companies that team size is a very tiny number of 1.
        Daishiman 7y ago
        If your team size is 1 then you're not doing yourself any favor thinking about performance beyond basic usability when dev productivity is a far higher priority.
- goto11 7y ago
  > Tell that to accounting Are you suggesting that accounting only cares about the AWS bill but not at all about the salary of developers?
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    A developer using an AOT compiled language can still earn the same salary.
    - goto11 7y ago
      Not all languages are equally productive though.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        Plenty of languages are as productive as Python while compiling to native code out of the box, without extra tooling. Includig a couple that are as dynamic as Python.
        pleasecalllater 7y ago
        Examples, please.

advanceduser 7y ago

You're gonna flip when you hear about the environmental impact of a developer.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago
just imagine using python of cryptocurrency mining.
- SEJeff 7y ago
  Or javascript in the browser via malicious js files from hacked ad sites!

geofft 7y ago

What is that impact, quantitatively?

yawaramin 7y ago
See https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-l...
- geofft 7y ago
  Thanks, that definitely looks like useful data as a starting point. 1. What is the impact of a continuous long-running process? That is, if instead of trying to calculate a result and then shut down, I'm running a web server 24/7, what's the impact of an interpreted language over a compiled language? (Assume requests are few and I'm happy with performance with either.) This not models web servers but things like data science workloads where one wants to conduct as much research as possible, so a faster language will just encourage a researcher to submit more jobs. 2. According to https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-ca... , 1 megawatt-hour of fossil fuels is 1559 pounds of carbon dioxide. The site you link calculates an excess of 2245 joules for running their test programs, which is approximately .001 pounds of carbon dioxide, or roughly what a human exhales in half a minute. (Put another way, if using the interpreted language saved even one minute of developer time, it was a net win for the carbon emissions of the program.)
  - edflsafoiewq 7y ago
    > Put another way, if using the interpreted language saved even one minute of developer time, it was a net win for the carbon emissions of the program Developers continue breathing even when they aren't programming.
    - CameronNemo 7y ago
      I do not believe that was ever in question.