Rust fucks over nearly all other languages for energy efficiency

https://sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages

>Bu-bu-but muh sjeweqews

Trump-turds #btfo

Other urls found in this thread:

sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages
forge.rust-lang.org/platform-support.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Still too hard to use

Write-only tier.
Only Perl can being worse.

sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages

Fixed
>T. Brainlet

>Normalized global results

>Rust #2

Maybe you need to learn to read, Pajeet.

Energy efficiency as a metric for programming languages? kys

Back to pol you go

Is coding in an energy efficient way reflected in the code of conduct?

Wrong question.
Right question:
Does the code of conduct stop you coding in an efficient way? Codes of conduct can't control your behavior, only advise people to not behave like dickheads.

When one https is just not enough

I don't care, I'm still not learning a language that won't help me get jobs.

I'm a white male so I am not allowed to use it.

>Seeing programming as a means to an end

It's okay you still have Forth at least

>energy efficient
>programming language
what the fuck is google doing?
Is there even compilers for rust that can target embedded CPU's?

>what the fuck is google doing?
minimizing their gargantuan power bills, you utter brainlet

Actually, looking at the site it's not as retarded as it sounds

programming language cannot be energy efficient. The energy comsumption depends what runs on the hardware.
dumb rust poster, you faggots should fuck off back to >>>/reddit/

Yes

> Is there even compilers for rust that can target embedded CPU's?
Yes: forge.rust-lang.org/platform-support.html

Sorry to disappoint you but you man be literally retarded.

It's literally more verbose than C++ in some cases too

No, it's too easy to use. Everything should be hard to use. Life should be difficult. It helps to cull the herd.

Wouldn't the energy consumption be dependent on the CPU as well? I mean obviously some CPUs are more power efficient than others, that's not what I mean. Aren't some cpus going to be more efficient with some code than others due to optimizations? If you had two cpus that were the same speed and used the same amount of watts, can one ran code certain code more efficiently due to scheduling optimizations? I'm not sure I'm using the correct terminology.

Yes, sometimes it can be, for things like references, but it's because it uses a completely different approach to memory management. The upside is that you're guaranteed not to have memory errors and data races in safe code, which totally worth it. In most other cases it's less verbose, thanks to things like ADT, pattern matching, monadic error handling, modern standard library, real type inference.

And embarass anyone in the process.

>waste half of your time fighting against the type system instead of getting shit done
>get harassed by peaceful liberals because your variable names do not conform the CoC

Interesting.
Fortran not doing bad either.

(((Normalized)))

Learn perl properly pajeet before you attack it

All optimizations are essentially just ways to do less work and get the same result.
>some cpus going to be more efficient with some code than others due to optimizations
I guess. You can build circuitry to just to solve specific problems better.

>everythings atomic
>good performance

That's literally what you're doing with this thread OP.
Rust is useless because no one wants to use it.

No one wants to use it for a large variety of reasons, shilling it for a single reason that it might better than other reasons is promoting the idea that the programming itself is more important than the output.

The output and being able to fix it in the future is more important than write-once energy efficiency.

Only poo-in-loos whose jobs depend on writing new code forever would disagree.

Not OP here, but programming is about a e s t h e t i c s. That you lay out your data structure to cache boundaries. That your struct members are hot/cold sorted. That your algorithms access your memory locations in well-predictable patterns. That your algorithms compile to the best assembly.

That you look at your assembly and feel pride.

That is programming.

>Sup Forums fag doesn't know what programming is about
what a surprise.
programming is about solving real world problems. in the old days regular programmers would make programs that predicted or simulated weather, or some other useful program. nowadays everyone is just concerned with writing "good code" (which is largely subjective) or recreating something that isn't useful outside of the web. most programmers these days wouldn't be able to make a program that simulated weather. programmers are fucking retarded and can't do shit but write hello world over and over again or write some basic task like fizzbuzz. and you're no different if you actually think programming is about "muh good code". fuck off Linus you retard nigger.

it isn't that hard, like everything in life once you get used to, programming becomes robotic

Still doesn't support FreeBSD and OpenBSD in tier 1.

C WINS
W
I
N
S

In general, applications that use less CPU time and less memory use less energy, since that means the CPU is allowed to idle for longer. Rust, C, C++, and Fortran are all languages that compile to fast, memory-efficient native code. So it's pretty much natural that it would be the most energy-efficient as well.

C is still winnder

As someone with 18+ years of C/C++ experience, I can tell you:

First, real world problem-solving programs are big. Simply for the reason that all low-hanging fruit has already been taken.

Second, big programs need multiple people or a huge amount of time.

Third, multiple people lead to shitty code. That's just a fact. The easiest way to keep your program nice and clean is to not let anybody near its code. Unfortunately, this is not possible in the industry.

Therefore, the real solution is clear:

Do not code at work.

Do programming as a hobby, where you can have your a e s t h e t i c s.

Programming for money, i.e. as a means to an end, is shit.

>But how can I earn moneys
You just have to have money.

>nowadays everyone is just concerned with writing "good code" (which is largely subjective)
Nearly nobody cares what their assembly looks like (or how to even view it). So, no, most people do not care about "good code".

Question for you: Do you know how to view the assembly of your C/C++ program?

all this thread safety just doesnt work for me, fucking black magic, im not gonna exchange my soul fo it

>you just have to have money
Silly poor people, why don't they just buy more money?

> [b]Do not code at work. Do programming as a hobby, where you can have your a e s t h e t i c s. Programming for money, i.e. as a means to an end, is shit.[/b]
>[b] [/b]
Go back to that shithole you came from, you fucking newfag.

Dude, programming for money is the worst reason to do programming.

Perhaps, but everyone has to make money to live, and if all you can do it program, it might as well be your means of earning a living.

At least I edited it, but you have a space after the first opening angle bracket.

A space!

Btw a certain German image board allows these tags since its inception.

Doing bad programming for money is worse than doing good programming for no money.

See: Terry.

C fucks over all other languages. What's your point?

Looks like rust is 7 times slower than C...

Surprisingly it's faster than C++ tho

I've been away from Sup Forums for a while but explain to me why an analysis of energy consumption efficiency of programming languages is being posted along with the phrase "trump-turds"

hack is also faster than sepples. Conclusion the sepples implementation is really bad.

it's been a while since I did any C but I believe you add a -s in gcc

>mfw C is still the best after nearly 50 years.

Time \sigma = Time variance
CPU \bar{x} = Average CPU time

You should look at the Time column. It's 1125 vs 1263.

CPU \bar{x} = Average CPU energy

Jumped the gun here.

>no color forth
It's like this list is made by plebs for plebs

Daily reminder that the Rust developers support breaking the law, violence, injury and harm, animal cruelty, rioting, etc.

based pascal

>Do not code at work.
>Do programming as a hobby, where you can have your a e s t h e t i c s.
>Programming for money, i.e. as a means to an end, is shit.
This user gets it.

>Nearly nobody cares what their assembly looks like (or how to even view it).
This is also true. I spent last weekend porting some ZSNES code from assembly (NASM) to C and it was painful because the guy seemed to write just good enough for it not to blow your computer up. Most of the time he used macros instead of function calls so there's a lot of register cobbling going on all the time. I'm surprised ZSNES worked at all.

>Rust loses to even C++
This is it for these retards.

Who the hell would write a user space program exclusively in assembly, and macro-heavy assembly at that?

C++ is efficient though. I'm not sure why this surprises you.

ZSNES was originally written for DOS in assembly and when 32bit became mainstream they just ported it to 32bit x86 assembly. I can understand writing the emulation code in assembly in order to squeeze more speed out of the hardware but writing the GUI itself in assembly was just stupid imo.

>learning a new language is so hard

Not if you already know how to program, cockweasel.

>They have a CoC that basically just says "don't be a cunt", mostly so they can say they have one to appease people
>"oh god muh sjws, programming languages literally don't work if the creators made a CoC!"

There's nothing stopping you from making your own rust channels or dev channels. You don't have the right to roll into channels and start memespouting Sup Forums shit everywhere.

At no point in a dev channel should you ever need to bring up "the Jews" or "pajeet" or whatever bullshit that's not on-topic. The only conversation that needs to be had in a dev channel is about actual dev shit, and you don't need to be able to call people faggots to do that.

That said, I also assume that just as with SJWs, you're crying over shit that would never even affect you in the first place, because you don't actually write any code, and the only reason you know about it at all is because someone told you it went against your dogmatic ideological worldview.

Well for one it shows youre not a pajeet

C and C++ still reign supreme. I don't get it, why use Rust?

security

C is too limited and C++ is an ugly mess. I for one am open to the idea of a replacement.

There's plenty of ways to show you're not a Pajeet. Writing literate C or C++ would be one way to do it.

C is such an old language, is it really so hard for a company to lay down coding standards that meet their criteria for security?
I can understand that, so like readability? So, the benefit of Rust would be it reads like a high level language, but has significantly better performance?

Not readability per se, just more consistency in general.

>Can't read assembly
Yeah, you're a pajeet.

Yeah, high level languages are practical for today's programming demands, but people who have a vendetta against low-level programming don't deserve to have an opinion

I am very well capable of reading assembly, and writing it too. But I would never think to write a user space program in it. It's not practical, it's not maintainable, and it's not portable.

When I say literate C or C++, I am not implying that these languages are more literate, I am implying that when Pajeets write C and C++, that they do not write readable C and C++.