4 ms·

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.