41–50 of 114 posts
I prefer C#. But here the Go code actually looks like normal production code while the C# examples look like something made by a low-level optimization wizard.
There wasn’t even a lot of “modern C#” low level optimization like ref-structs/spans and similar. It actually looks like there is quite a bit of performance from C#8, 9, 10 left on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> even ships with its own cloud environment (Azure) Can you elaborate on this? What does it mean that ".Net ships with Azure"?
Microsoft created .NET and Azure and a lot of the tooling so the integration is tight, now that it's multi platform and with Rider (multiplatform .NET IDE) being as good as if not better than Visual Studio there is nothing stopping it.
I say modern .NET is a marvel of features, development tools, interoperability, performance and even ships with its own cloud environment (Azure). Unfortunately developers who don’t know better judge it by it’s historical association with Windows rather than how powerful it is today.
Can you now get the full .NET development experience in a Linux-only environment? I haven't used it in a while, but from using Unity (game engine) it seemed like C# on Linux was a bit crippled
I've always thought the whole ecosystem looked really productive, and the code I've had to review occasionally looked well structured and readable. But when I was starting out MSDN cost a fortune and I've never really considered trying to learn it.
I prefer C#. But here the Go code actually looks like normal production code while the C# examples look like something made by a low-level optimization wizard.
I looked at the k-nucleotide, n-body, etc and saw nothing out of the ordinary in terms of C#. There wasn’t even a lot of “modern C#” low level optimization like ref-structs/spans and similar. It actually looks like there is quite a bit of performance from C#8, 9, 10 left on the table.
Tons of very "interesting" attributes like this:
// prevent inlining into main to decrease JIT time to generate main
[SkipLocalsInit][MethodImpl(NoInlining)]
[SkipLocalsInit][StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit, Pack = 32)]
[SkipLocalsInit][MethodImpl(AggressiveOptimization | NoInlining)]
[FieldOffset(32)]
Not to mention that the entire file is using explicit vectorization, which I consider to be a very high degree of optimization -- tons of software never bothers to implement explicit vectorization, and does just fine.
If all of this is "nothing out of the ordinary", then "ordinary" C# has changed a lot since I last spent much time with it.
[0]: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
I say modern .NET is a marvel of features, development tools, interoperability, performance and even ships with its own cloud environment (Azure). Unfortunately developers who don’t know better judge it by it’s historical association with Windows rather than how powerful it is today.
> Unfortunately developers who don’t know better judge it by it’s historical association with Windows rather than how powerful it is today. Some of us actually got to experience the entire journey from the old to new world first-hand. We started out as a .NET 3.5 Framework solution (windows only), and are now looking at a .NET 6 upgrade (any platform). Over the course of 7+ years, we went through all of the following…
I prefer C#. But here the Go code actually looks like normal production code while the C# examples look like something made by a low-level optimization wizard.
I can't imagine a better setup for a language flame war :). I really like debating languages, so I hope it doesn't go that direction. One of the standard caveats with this particular benchmark game with respect to Go is idiomatic optimizations are prohibited. To use the btree example, Go's memory management is low latency and non-moving, so allocations are expensive--any Go programmer writing a performance-sensitive…
Which is not accepted for the C# programs either.
sync.Pool is accepted —
https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
> the Go version is expressly contrived to be slower
The requirements were contrived in April 2008.
afaict Go initial release was March 2012.
Why does their web site have no contact nor link to where the source code for the project can be checked out, contributed to, or amended?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I looked at the k-nucleotide, n-body, etc and saw nothing out of the ordinary in terms of C#. There wasn’t even a lot of “modern C#” low level optimization like ref-structs/spans and similar. It actually looks like there is quite a bit of performance from C#8, 9, 10 left on the table.
Are we looking at the same file?[0] Tons of very "interesting" attributes like this: // prevent inlining into main to decrease JIT time to generate main [SkipLocalsInit][MethodImpl(NoInlining)] [SkipLocalsInit][StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit, Pack = 32)] [SkipLocalsInit][MethodImpl(AggressiveOptimization | NoInlining)] [FieldOffset(32)] and tons of "unchecked" blocks. Not to mention that the entire file is using ex…
For the particular case of n-body you could argue you are already in a pretty extreme HPC world and doing it without vectors would basically be a toy calculator. The problem then of course that C# isn’t really ever idiomatic for that. The question (as alaways) becomes about what to compare. Typical or pushed to the limit.