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

Python consumes 38x more energy than Java

stratoflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–142 of 142 posts

Re: Python consumes 38x more energy than Java

#141

Post by igouy »

dahart wrote: post #140
igouy wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> … not … primarily an issue with means vs medians We're comparing averages, why would we bother so much about the cause of an outlier. > you linked directly to the C++ code for spectral-norm You had linked to the wrong C and C++ code for spectral-norm, I linked to the code that was actually used. > The time ratio of the Benchmarks Game fastest C version to the slowest C++ version is over 16x. Again, you seem to be l…

I was talking about the Benchmarks game repo code. (But it doesn’t even matter because the SLE is equally bad.) And I was not comparing any averages, I was pointing out that use of boost is the entire reason the average is skewed and misleading. You seem to be misunderstanding my comments.

> I was talking about the benchmarks game repo code

Why? The benchmarks game doesn't show energy use of programs.

> use of boost is the entire reason

As you know, the fastest C++ program shown on the benchmarks game website uses pcre2.h.

Re: Python consumes 38x more energy than Java

#142

Post by dahart »

igouy wrote: post #141
dahart wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was talking about the Benchmarks game repo code. (But it doesn’t even matter because the SLE is equally bad.) And I was not comparing any averages, I was pointing out that use of boost is the entire reason the average is skewed and misleading. You seem to be misunderstanding my comments.

> I was talking about the benchmarks game repo code Why? The benchmarks game doesn't show energy use of programs. > use of boost is the entire reason As you know, the fastest C++ program shown on the benchmarks game website uses pcre2.h.

In case you didn’t read the thread above or the comment I replied to, the subject had already veered away from energy use, with the comment by @tasubotadas, and my top comment was responding to that. I wasn’t ever commenting specifically on energy use per-se, I was commenting on the reason for the outlier, and responding to a specific comment about C++. That said, this just so happens to be completely relevant to both runtime and energy use. The benchmarks game and the SLE data both agree that using boost causes approximately an order of magnitude slowdown/energy increase to the regex-redux sample. I looked at both, and at your insistence I responded with SLE specific remarks. The lesson here is consider not using boost if you care about energy use, or about runtime. Is there a point you’re trying to make here?
Post reply on HN