balder1993@programming.dev
on 12 Apr 01:35
nextcollapse
Benchmarks should be like a scientific paper: they should describe all the choices made and why for the configurations. At least that will show if the people doing it really understand what they’re comparing.
UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
on 12 Apr 01:57
nextcollapse
Have you ever read a paper? You can consider yourself lucky if they have error bars and repeated their measurements more than once. The quality of “benchmarking papers” is comically bad (on average).
UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
on 13 Apr 12:13
collapse
I don’t know and I won’t pretend it does have any statistical significance. I will just say that I have read dozens of papers and anecdotally, the results were questionable in almost all cases. And not because of the possibility that they might have missed something, but because of basic shortcomings. Some don’t even state how often they repeated their experiments, software versions, whether they accounted for caching effects, (system) temperature, hardware characteristics, you name it.
That’s why I wouldn’t name papers a prime example for clean benchmarking. The quality on YT news outlets like Gamers Nexus or Hardware Unboxed is higher than most of them by far.
FizzyOrange@programming.dev
on 13 Apr 09:20
collapse
Yeah I have to second UnfortunateShort. Benchmarking papers are on average very bad, often because they’re trying to push a particular idea or product and are very biased, or because they’re like “my first benchmark” and done by people who don’t know what they’re doing.
A classic one that gets referenced a lot is “Energy Efficiency Across Programming Languages” I which the authors seriously benchmarked programs from the very heavily gamed Computer Language Benchmarks Game, and concluded among other things that JavaScript is much more energy efficient than Typescript.
The only realistic way to benchmark different languages is to take implementations that weren’t written to be fast in a benchmark. For example Rosetta Code, or maybe leetcode.com solutions.
Or to do it yourself. But that requires you to be experienced in many languages.
Difficult for obvious reasons.
bonus_crab@lemmy.world
on 13 Apr 05:27
nextcollapse
so to briefly answer the question in the title after reading the article : i dunno maybe prepared statements
snaggen@programming.dev
on 13 Apr 07:09
nextcollapse
You don’t have to understand everything, it is ok. And joining a language community for a language you hate just to rant about it, shows that you should try to focus on letting things go. It feels a bit obsessive.
If you actually like to have a conversation about the language, I suggest you be a bit more specific and we will try to answer to the best of our ability.
porgamrer@programming.dev
on 13 Apr 12:43
collapse
What a whirlwind!
Also, Rust is perhaps, the shittiest, slowest compiled language out there. Even TCC has a leg up on it.
TCC is written exclusively to compile quickly, not to do any real optimisation. There is no conceivable situation in which TCC output will outperform equivalent Rust code.
If you really like how Rust handles its syntax, use a real functional language like OCaml
Rust takes inspiration from OCaml in almost every area except syntax. Close to zero syntax similarly.
In fact, SML compilers like MLton are sometimes faster than Rust.
Lmao, this is a classic line from ~2009 message boards, but with “C++” swapped out for Rust.
Almost every single thing you said is wrong, but in a way too precise to be attributed to random noise. Like scoring zero in a multiple choice exam. I don’t know if you are some kind of performance art troll, but please continue. I’m an instant fan of your work.
I would have expected that at least all the frameworks were using the same database, but no. Some frameworks use MySQL, others use PostgreSQL. Some framework implementations are ultra-optimized and others are what you would expect in your average web application. Some frameworks are using proper templating libraries, others are using Sprintf.
threaded - newest
Benchmarks should be like a scientific paper: they should describe all the choices made and why for the configurations. At least that will show if the people doing it really understand what they’re comparing.
Have you ever read a paper? You can consider yourself lucky if they have error bars and repeated their measurements more than once. The quality of “benchmarking papers” is comically bad (on average).
What’s the error bar on that statement of yours?
I don’t know and I won’t pretend it does have any statistical significance. I will just say that I have read dozens of papers and anecdotally, the results were questionable in almost all cases. And not because of the possibility that they might have missed something, but because of basic shortcomings. Some don’t even state how often they repeated their experiments, software versions, whether they accounted for caching effects, (system) temperature, hardware characteristics, you name it.
That’s why I wouldn’t name papers a prime example for clean benchmarking. The quality on YT news outlets like Gamers Nexus or Hardware Unboxed is higher than most of them by far.
Yeah I have to second UnfortunateShort. Benchmarking papers are on average very bad, often because they’re trying to push a particular idea or product and are very biased, or because they’re like “my first benchmark” and done by people who don’t know what they’re doing.
A classic one that gets referenced a lot is “Energy Efficiency Across Programming Languages” I which the authors seriously benchmarked programs from the very heavily gamed Computer Language Benchmarks Game, and concluded among other things that JavaScript is much more energy efficient than Typescript.
The only realistic way to benchmark different languages is to take implementations that weren’t written to be fast in a benchmark. For example Rosetta Code, or maybe leetcode.com solutions.
Or to do it yourself. But that requires you to be experienced in many languages.
Difficult for obvious reasons.
so to briefly answer the question in the title after reading the article : i dunno maybe prepared statements
.
You don’t have to understand everything, it is ok. And joining a language community for a language you hate just to rant about it, shows that you should try to focus on letting things go. It feels a bit obsessive.
If you actually like to have a conversation about the language, I suggest you be a bit more specific and we will try to answer to the best of our ability.
Have a nice day, and don’t forget to breathe.
.
Please, please make a blog and spew your tirades there 😂
subjective
nope
Thank you for participating.
What a whirlwind!
TCC is written exclusively to compile quickly, not to do any real optimisation. There is no conceivable situation in which TCC output will outperform equivalent Rust code.
Rust takes inspiration from OCaml in almost every area except syntax. Close to zero syntax similarly.
Lmao, this is a classic line from ~2009 message boards, but with “C++” swapped out for Rust.
Almost every single thing you said is wrong, but in a way too precise to be attributed to random noise. Like scoring zero in a multiple choice exam. I don’t know if you are some kind of performance art troll, but please continue. I’m an instant fan of your work.