Here is an interesting article that could help as a start: https://thenewstack.io/which-programming-languages-use-the-least-electricity/
Cheers, On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:41 PM Richard O'Keefe <rao...@gmail.com> wrote: > It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to talk about the energy efficiency > of a programming language. For example, I've seen the run time of a > C benchmark go from 50 seconds to 1 microsecond when the optimisation > level was changed. It doesn't even make much sense to talk about the > energy efficiency of the code generated by a specific compiler with > specific options: the underlying hardware counts too. A colleague of > mine, looking at text compression algorithms for an information retrieval > engine, found that the fastest algorithm depended on just which x86-64 > chip, even what motherboard, was in use. It's obviously going to be > the same for energy efficiency. > > So let's specify a particular physical machine, a particular compiler, > and a particular set of compiler options. NOW does it make sense to > talk about energy efficiency? Nope. It's going to depend on the > problem as well. And the thing is that people tend to do different > things in different programming languages, and different communities > attract different support. There is no portable Smalltalk equivalent > of NumPy, able to automatically take advantage of GPUs, for example. > > You can get some real surprises. > For example, just now while writing this message, I fired up > powerstat(8). I had the browser open and power consumption was > about 12.8 W. I then launched Squeak and ran some benchmarks. > Power consumption went DOWN to 11.4 W. > That is, Squeak was "costing" me -1.4 W. > > If you understand the kind of things modern CPUs get up to, that > is not as surprising as it seems. All it demonstrates is that > getting MEANINGFUL answers is hard enough; getting GENERALISBLE > answers is going to be, well, if anyone succeeded, I think they > would have earned at least a Masters. > > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 at 23:38, Jonathan van Alteren < > jvalte...@objectguild.com> wrote: > >> Hi Stéphane, >> >> Thanks for your feedback. I agree that the usefulness of these results is >> limited. However, if we (Object Guild) want to make a case for energy >> efficiency, it can help if the language itself can be shown to be efficient >> as well. >> >> For now, I think the efficiency will need to come from a good object >> design. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Jonathan van Alteren >> >> Founding Member | Object Guild B.V. >> *Sustainable Software for Purpose-Driven Organizations* >> >> On 11 Oct 2020, 16:49 +0200, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr>, >> wrote: >> >> The problem is that what do you measure. >> When you move computation from the CPU to a GPU for example does it >> consume less or more. >> I think that such analyses are totally stupid. >> Is a fast execution consume less? I have serious doubts about it. >> Now if we measure how fast we drain a battery because of polling vs event >> based then this is different. >> >> S. >> >> On 1 Oct 2020, at 13:47, Jonathan van Alteren <jvalte...@objectguild.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I am interested in energy efficiency metrics for Pharo (version >=8). >> Just now, I came across this research and related GitHub project: >> >> - https://sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages >> - https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages >> >> >> Unfortunately, the paper mentions that Smalltalk was excluded from the >> results because the (VW) compiler was proprietary :-S However, the GitHub >> repository does contain Smalltalk code and results, but I haven't been able >> to evaluate those. >> >> [1] Does anyone here have more information on this topic? >> >> >> The benchmarks seem to be low-level algorithms. Although that is useful, >> I think that a better argument for Pharo/Smalltalk efficiency is that a >> good OO design (e.g. created using responsibility-driven design with >> behaviorally complete objects) will be a better fit, can be much simpler >> and will thus be more efficient during development, as well as easier to >> maintain and evolve. >> >> [2] Has anyone done any research in this area that can quantify this >> aspect? >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Jonathan van Alteren >> >> Founding Member | Object Guild B.V. >> *Sustainable Software for Purpose-Driven Organizations* >> >> jvalte...@objectguild.com >> >> >> -------------------------------------------- >> Stéphane Ducasse >> http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr / http://www.pharo.org >> 03 59 35 87 52 >> Assistant: Aurore Dalle >> FAX 03 59 57 78 50 >> TEL 03 59 35 86 16 >> S. Ducasse - Inria >> 40, avenue Halley, >> Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza >> Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650 >> France >> >> -- Mariano Martinez Peck Email: marianop...@gmail.com Twitter: @MartinezPeck LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-martinez-peck <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/> Blog: https://marianopeck.wordpress.com/
