On 2020-10-10 15:58:18 +0000, Peter Pearson wrote: > Python advocates might want to organize their thoughts on > this subject before their bosses spring the suggestion: > > From > https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/we-re-part-problem-astronomers-confront-their-role-and-vulnerability-climate-change > : > > . . . Astronomers should also abandon popular programming languages > such as Python in favor of efficient compiled languages. Languages > such as Fortran and C++, Zwart calculates, are more than 100 times > more carbon efficient than Python because they require fewer > operations. >
It would be interesting on which data he based these calculations. For
simple benchmarks of numerical code that's almost certainly true, but I
doubt anyone writes code intended to run on a supercomputer in plain
Python. Surely such programs would use numpy or other specialized
libraries which are already written in C or Fortran and may even use a
GPU if present? There is of course still some overhead, but it's much
smaller.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | h...@hjp.at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
