this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
88 points (86.7% liked)

Programming

20951 readers
96 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31184706

C is one of the top languages in terms of speed, memory and energy

https://www.threads.com/@engineerscodex/post/C9_R-uhvGbv?hl=en

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brisk@aussie.zone 34 points 1 week ago (6 children)

For those who don't want to open threads, it's a link to a paper on energy efficiency of programming languages.

[–] brisk@aussie.zone 41 points 1 week ago (29 children)
[–] TwistyLex@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 days ago

For Haskell to land that low on the list tells me they either couldn't find a good Haskell programmer and/or weren't using GHC.

[–] GiorgioPerlasca@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Every time I get surprised by the efficiency of Lisp! I guess they mean Common Lisp there, not Clojure or any modern dialect.

[–] monomon@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago

Yeah every time I see this chart I think "unless it's performance critical, realtime, or embedded, why would I use anything else?" It's very flexible, a joy to use, amazing interactive shell(s). Paren navigation is awesome. The build/tooling is not the best, but it is manageable.

That said, OCaml is nice too.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 6 days ago

Looking at the Energy/Time ratios (lower is better) on page 15 is also interesting, it gives an idea of how "power hungry per CPU cycle" each language might be. Python's very high

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Wonder what they used for the JS state since it's dependent on the runtime.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 14 points 1 week ago (20 children)

Also the difference between TS and JS doesn't make sense at first glance. 🤷‍♂️ I guess I need to read the research.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 6 points 6 days ago

My first thought is perhaps the TS is not targeting ESNext so they're getting hit with polyfills or something

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess we can take the overhead of rust considering all the advantages. Go however... can't even.

[–] Kacarott@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Even Haskell is higher on the list than Go, which surprises me a lot

[–] Colloidal@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But Go has go faster stripes in the logo! Google wouldn't make false advertising, would they?

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Now we just need a language with flames in the logq

[–] Matriks404@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

For Lua I think it's just for the interpreted version, I've heard that LuaJIT is amazingly fast (comparable to C++ code), and that's what for example Löve (game engine) uses, and probably many other projects as well.

load more comments (22 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)