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

PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

nerds-central.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#21

Post by NerdsCentral »

AlexandrB wrote: post #13
cassandravoiton wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is that not the point of the post - that all the 'easy and cheep' comes at a huge cost to be planet and eventually to the company. Are C# and Java really that much harder to learn and use?

It's trivial to write monstrously inefficient C/C++ - arguably it's even easier than writing slow Python code, because high level concepts like events and callbacks are harder to express programatically and code that should be event-driven becomes: while (1) { // check for input } And no offense to the TFA, but all the academic code I've seen is buggy, slow, and inefficient - hardly using "every ounce of efficiency".…

Most real scientific computing (quantum mechanics - in which I did my doctorate, meteorology, astrophysics etc.) is done in C or more normally FORTRAN. The code will use highly optimised routines like BLAS. It is normal to perform careful inner loop optimizations for each target platform.

Don't talk about things you don't understand.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#22

Post by NerdsCentral »

gdg92989 wrote: post #10
cassandravoiton wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - HTML5 would be much much better - it will come soon I expect.

Although I will concede that flash is an abomination that needs to be removed from all my computers. haha

Yes - I said that some time ago.. http://nerds-central.blogspot.co.uk/2007/06/why-flash-is-per... and http://nerds-central.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/steve-jobs-agree...

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#23

Post by NerdsCentral »

gdg92989 wrote: post #20
cassandravoiton wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If code runs faster then the user time is wasted less as well. That seems in alignment with the ideas behind the video.

I don't want to hear the "faster programs save the user time too" argument its total BS. the vast majority of CPU time is spent waiting for the user. So while you're on a holy quest maximizing 100,000 instructions down to 1,000, every second that the user wastes dealing with your neglected UI 1,000,000,000 cycles are wasted (and that's on a machine with a single 1ghz processor).

The post is talking about servers. Most scripting is for code running on servers. Servers do not wait for the user. Your comment has zero merit.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#24

Post by gdg92989 »

NerdsCentral wrote: post #23
gdg92989 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to hear the "faster programs save the user time too" argument its total BS. the vast majority of CPU time is spent waiting for the user. So while you're on a holy quest maximizing 100,000 instructions down to 1,000, every second that the user wastes dealing with your neglected UI 1,000,000,000 cycles are wasted (and that's on a machine with a single 1ghz processor).

The post is talking about servers. Most scripting is for code running on servers. Servers do not wait for the user. Your comment has zero merit.

no.. your comment and your whole shortsighted video have no merit. Servers spend time waiting for users as well. Whether its waiting for the next HTTP request or the next batch processing job servers wait for people too.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#25

Post by AlexandrB »

NerdsCentral wrote: post #21
AlexandrB wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's trivial to write monstrously inefficient C/C++ - arguably it's even easier than writing slow Python code, because high level concepts like events and callbacks are harder to express programatically and code that should be event-driven becomes: while (1) { // check for input } And no offense to the TFA, but all the academic code I've seen is buggy, slow, and inefficient - hardly using "every ounce of efficiency".…

Most real scientific computing (quantum mechanics - in which I did my doctorate, meteorology, astrophysics etc.) is done in C or more normally FORTRAN. The code will use highly optimised routines like BLAS. It is normal to perform careful inner loop optimizations for each target platform. Don't talk about things you don't understand.

> Don't talk about things you don't understand.

Fair enough, but you do realize that not everyone will optimize inner loops after switching to C/Java? Certainly not to the extent of scientific computing or even the language shootout snippets.

Also to address the power usage of one server. The 6.6 tonnes number seems to come from having the server drawing 1kw of power continuously for an entire year. The biggest server I could find on Dell's site (E910) comes with a 1.1KW power supply. This DOES NOT mean that it draws 1.1KW continuously. Indeed, outside of peak usage hours it probably draws much less. This is amortized over many users as well. Even slow, interpreted languages can serve hundreds of users on such a server.

Compare this to driving 10 miles/day in a medium-sized car. This produces 2 tonnes of CO2 annually, and unless you're diligent at carpooling, probably serves one person. Even a small car will still use half of that. If some new software helps even a small number of people telecommute instead of driving, the result is overall positive. For this to work, such software has to be cheap (certainly cheaper than driving) and for that to happen programmer time must be conserved.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#26

Post by NerdsCentral »

gdg92989 wrote: post #24
NerdsCentral wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post is talking about servers. Most scripting is for code running on servers. Servers do not wait for the user. Your comment has zero merit.

no.. your comment and your whole shortsighted video have no merit. Servers spend time waiting for users as well. Whether its waiting for the next HTTP request or the next batch processing job servers wait for people too.

OK, I'll explain this as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. When one commissions a server or server farm it is done against a service non functional requirement. For example 1 second page serve time at peak load. This means that a lot of the time the servers might be waiting but not a peak load. Never the less, modern servers will clock down if waiting. Now, what sets the peak load is the efficiency of the software and the number of people using the server and/or the run length of the batch jobs. The more efficient the software the less servers are required to meet the peak load and so the less power is used all the time. Further, the more efficient the software the less often servers will have to clock up during off peak times. Do you finally get it? If not - I suspect you have zero idea about large scale computing and are here only to defend your lack of ability to program anything other than scripts.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#27

Post by 3pt14159 »

cassandravoiton wrote: post #16
3pt14159 wrote: post #14

I hate environmentalists. Don't get me wrong, I love the environment, I even call myself a geolibertarian at Mises conferences, but the problem I have with environmentalists is that they think "the world doesn't boil down to dollars and cents" (This was actually said to me). Let's be very, very generous here and assume that it would take twice as long to code something in C that it would in Python. Let's assume that…

You shoot down our own argument. The video suggest C# and Java as alternatives to interpreted languages. By picking C you are deliberately trying to make your argument sound stronger than it is. The video also mentions the economic cost. From an economics point of view you are just wrong. Because of the vast numbers of computers used in 'scale out' architectures the impact of code efficiency is enormously bigger than…

The video wouldn't run in my OS (which isn't standard, granted, but still).

Most software that ships to hundreds of thousands of computers is software that must run on other people's machines. If it must, then it is automatically in the markets best interest to optimize to require less overhead since it will give them access to a larger portion of the market. If it is for their own internal servers, then again it is in the market's best interest to roll it in C or similar since they are able to make the distinction as to where it is worth it to convert it to a lower level language.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#29

Post by NerdsCentral »

cultureulterior wrote: post #28

Opposing nuclear power is immoral. Writing code is ruby is good sense. CO2 is only a problem if we let it be.

Not sure of the connection here. BTW - check out the nerds-central post on why Thorium matters if you are pro-nuclear - it might have some good amo for you to use.

Re: PHP/Python/Ruby - Immoral?

#30

Post by NerdsCentral »

AlexandrB wrote: post #25
NerdsCentral wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most real scientific computing (quantum mechanics - in which I did my doctorate, meteorology, astrophysics etc.) is done in C or more normally FORTRAN. The code will use highly optimised routines like BLAS. It is normal to perform careful inner loop optimizations for each target platform. Don't talk about things you don't understand.

> Don't talk about things you don't understand. Fair enough, but you do realize that not everyone will optimize inner loops after switching to C/Java? Certainly not to the extent of scientific computing or even the language shootout snippets. Also to address the power usage of one server. The 6.6 tonnes number seems to come from having the server drawing 1kw of power continuously for an entire year. The biggest serve…

Good arguments. I based 1kw on the 800 watt rating of the machine mentioned plus a/c etc. It is all ball park and I am a bit shocked you are the only person to call me out. But it does not matter because if you 1 tonne per year - it is still plenty. The car thing is a good point to make but I think you are stretching it with the telecommuting. This is especially so as the key to telecommuting if fast software (ever tried implementing video streaming in an interpreted language?) The amortized over many people point correct but not valid to the argument as it is a multiplicative not additive effect it has as no impact on the over all calculation.
Post reply on HN