Haskell did not shine here. Ocaml did surprisingly well.
Energy Efficiency Across Programming Languages
141–143 of 143 posts
Re: Energy Efficiency Across Programming Languages
#142According to their normalized "global" results, something interesting i see: 1. Pascal, surprisingly, the most memory efficient of all. I should take a look at the implementation they used. 2. Rust a good alternative to C which leads in "energy efficiency" and speed. 3. Common Lisp most energy-efficient and fastest and smallest memory footprint of all the dynamic programming languages in the list -- like Python, Ruby…
Imaging if the world ran on SBCL instead :)
SBCL is one lisp that I intend to learn more about. It's apparently the lisp of choice for XMaxima, which is a program that I used a lot in high school.
Re: Energy Efficiency Across Programming Languages
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lua is not compiled to machine code… Do you think Roberto Ierusalimschy is confused about that ? Again, here's what the creator of Lua says -- "… the distinguishing feature of interpreted languages is not that they are not compiled, but that any eventual compiler is part of the language runtime…" EDIT: Is that not what you mean by "interpreted language" ?
> Do you think Roberto Ierusalimschy is confused about that ? No, of course not. I think you are. You are clearly misinterpreting his words. I will repeat, (PUC)Lua is not compiled to machine code, but to an intermediate bytecode form. Those are completely different things, and what I said does not come in conflict at all with the quote you took from PiL, so I don't know what you are confronting me about.
> Lua is not compiled to machine code, but to an intermediate bytecode form.
Correct.
Now look at what Roberto Ierusalimschy means by "interpreted language": "… the distinguishing feature of interpreted languages is not that they are not compiled, but that any eventual compiler is part of the language runtime and that, therefore, it is possible (and easy) to execute code generated on the fly."
Is that what you mean by "interpreted language" ?