Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

scienceblogs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–106 of 106 posts

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#101

Post by igouy »

jlouis wrote: post #44
tim333 wrote: post #14

I'm not expert but looking at the benchmarks game data: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/fortran.html C seems to match Fortran on about half of them and be 2 or 3x quicker on the others.

Beware of putting too much into these benchmarks. They are far too simple to say anything about larger systems. In particular, large systems are to a great extent measured in how well they optimize interactions between different modules in the system. Stuff such as link-time-optimization is not going to be shown via the rather simple benchmarks in the shootout.

Not "the shootout". Not since 2007.

Perhaps that was the last time you looked ;-)

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#102

Post by igouy »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #37
moyix wrote: post #34

Against this article, we have the results from the computer language shootout: https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.ph... I like this because anyone can try to prove their assertion that their language is faster!

Unfortunately that site is very questionable although still might be the best resource. The person who runs it changed the interface to make it difficult to compare languages as well as it used to, and he purposely doesn't include many implementations and languages that people send him. There is no ISPC or Julia, the C and C++ benchmarks use SIMD intrinsics specific to gcc, the benchmarks are run on core 2 processors…

The person who runs it changed the interface to make it usable with touch screens.

"Why don't you include language X? … my favorite language implementation? … Microsoft® Windows® ?

Because I know it will take more time than I choose. Been there; done that."

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#languagex

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#103

Post by igouy »

moyix wrote: post #55
CyberDildonics wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately that site is very questionable although still might be the best resource. The person who runs it changed the interface to make it difficult to compare languages as well as it used to, and he purposely doesn't include many implementations and languages that people send him. There is no ISPC or Julia, the C and C++ benchmarks use SIMD intrinsics specific to gcc, the benchmarks are run on core 2 processors…

It's a shame no one has stepped up to provide a better alternative! I don't see any reason why it shouldn't accept, test, and post all submissions automatically using something like a Docker container.

Please step-up and do that!

"If you're interested in something not shown on the benchmarks game website then please take the program source code and the measurement scripts and publish your own measurements."

(And remember to include the license file in your redistribution.)

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#languagex

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#104

Post by CyberDildonics »

igouy wrote: post #102
CyberDildonics wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately that site is very questionable although still might be the best resource. The person who runs it changed the interface to make it difficult to compare languages as well as it used to, and he purposely doesn't include many implementations and languages that people send him. There is no ISPC or Julia, the C and C++ benchmarks use SIMD intrinsics specific to gcc, the benchmarks are run on core 2 processors…

The person who runs it changed the interface to make it usable with touch screens. "Why don't you include language X? … my favorite language implementation? … Microsoft® Windows® ? Because I know it will take more time than I choose. Been there; done that." http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#languagex

Either way the interface is not even close to being as useful as it was, and he has removed languages and implementations that were already up and running.

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#105

Post by igouy »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #104
igouy wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person who runs it changed the interface to make it usable with touch screens. "Why don't you include language X? … my favorite language implementation? … Microsoft® Windows® ? Because I know it will take more time than I choose. Been there; done that." http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#languagex

Either way the interface is not even close to being as useful as it was, and he has removed languages and implementations that were already up and running.

More useful for the vast majority who only make one or two comparisons -- the choices they never used are no longer in the way.

I've added new language implementations and programs!

Re: The “C Is Efficient” Language Fallacy (2006)

#106

Post by supercarrot »

sharth wrote: post #75
supercarrot wrote: post #6

as much as it's not part of the standard, __restrict__ allows limiting the effects of pointer aliasing in C/C++. [1] [1] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrict

The first line of your reference says that restrict __is__ part of the C99 standard.

I guess I'm to much in the C++17 land.
Post reply on HN