are-we-fast-yet
csharplang
are-we-fast-yet | csharplang | |
---|---|---|
18 | 262 | |
315 | 10,899 | |
- | 1.1% | |
8.8 | 9.6 | |
3 months ago | 7 days ago | |
Java | C# | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | - |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
are-we-fast-yet
-
Boehm Garbage Collector
> Sure there's a small overhead to smart pointers
Not so small, and it has the potential to significantly speed down an application when not used wisely. Here are e.g. some measurements where the programmer used C++11 and did everything with smart pointers: https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet/issues/80#issuecomm.... There was a speed down between factor 2 and 10 compared with the C++98 implementation. Also remember that smart pointers create memory leaks when used with circular references, and there is an additional memory allocation involved with each smart pointer.
> Garbage collection has an overhead too of course
The Boehm GC is surprisingly efficient. See e.g. these measurements: https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcase.... The same benchmark suite as above is compared with different versions of Mono (using the generational GC) and the C code (using Boehm GC) generated with my Oberon compiler. The latter only is 20% slower than the native C++98 version, and still twice as fast as Mono 5.
-
A C++ version of the Are-we-fast-yet benchmark suite
See https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet/blob/master/docs/guidelines.md.
-
The Bitter Truth: Python 3.11 vs. Cython vs. C++ Performance for Simulations
That's a very interesting article, thanks. Interesting to note that Cython is only about twice as fast as Python 3.10 and only about 40% faster than Python 3.11.
The official Python site advertises a speedup of 25% from 3.10 to 3.11; in the article a speedup of 60% was measured. It therefore usually makes sense to measure different algorithms. Unfortunately there is no Python or C++ implementation yet for https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet.
- Comparing Language Implementations with Objects, Closures, and Arrays
- Are We Fast Yet? Comparing Language Implementations with Objects, Closures, and Arrays
-
.NET 6 vs. .NET 5: up to 40% speedup
> Software benchmarks are super subjective.
No, they are not, but they are just a measurement tool, not a source of absolute thruth. When I studied engineering at ETH we learned "Who measures measures rubbish!" ("Wer misst misst Mist!" in German). Every measurement has errors and being aware of these errors and coping with it is part of the engineering profession. The problem with programming language benchmarks is often that the goal is to win by all means; to compare as fairly and objectively as possible instead, there must be a set of suitable rules adhered to by all benchmark implementations. Such a set of rules is e.g. given for the Are-we-fast-yet suite (https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet).
-
Is CoreCLR that much faster than Mono?
I am aware of the various published test results where CoreCLR shows fantastic speed-ups compared to Mono, e.g. when calculating MD5 or SHA hash sums.
But my measurements based on the Are-we-fast-yet benchmark suite (see https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet and https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/tree/master/testcases/Are-we-fast-yet) show a completely different picture. Here the difference between Mono and CoreCLR (both versions 3 and 5) is within +/- 10%, so nothing earth shattering.
Here are my measurement results:
https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcases/Are-we-fast-yet/Are-we-fast-yet_results_linux.pdf comparing the same benchmark on the same machine run under LuaJIT, Mono, Node.js and Crystal.
https://github.com/rochus-keller/Oberon/blob/master/testcases/Are-we-fast-yet/Are-we-fast-yet_results_windows.pdf comparing Mono, .Net 4 and CoreCLR 3 and 5 on the same machine.
Here are the assemblies of the Are-we-fast-yet benchmark suite used for the measurements, in case you want to reproduce my results: http://software.rochus-keller.ch/Are-we-fast-yet_CLI_2021-08-28.zip.
I was very surprised by the results. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I measured on x86, or that the benchmark suite used includes somewhat larger (i.e. more representative) applications than just micro benchmarks.
What are your opinions? Do others have similar results?
-
Is CoreCLR really that much faster than Mono?
There is a good reason for this; have a look at e.g. https://github.com/smarr/are-we-fast-yet/blob/master/docs/guidelines.md.
-
Why most programming language performance comparisons are most likely wrong
Then apparently the SOM nbody program is taken as the basis of a new Java nbody program.
csharplang
- Discriminated Unions: Essa feature faz falta no CSharp
-
DevDocs
Certain parts of Microsoft Learn are permissive, for example the .NET BCL documentation is Creative Commons Attribution: https://github.com/dotnet/dotnet-api-docs as is ASP.NET Core: https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs (a good hint if documentation is permissively licensed and on GitHub is if there's an edit button at the top.)
The C# language specification is unfortunately a bit fuzzier: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/4855
The updated unified C# language specification is CC, but it's still catching up to modern C#: https://github.com/dotnet/csharpstandard
-
The golden age of Kotlin and its uncertain future
No OP, but for example you still see the C# folks still struggling to add discriminated unions to the language because of complex interactions due to its too many features[1]. Virtual threads are easier to use than async/await is another example.
[1] https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/113
-
When static types make your code shorter
For example, C# had a research fork called Spec# that had compile-time support for contracts, with keywords such as requires (for arguments) and ensures (for return values), all the way back in 2004. While still being discussed, it doesn't seem to be shipping any time soon.
-
.NET 8 – .NET Blog
Hi there. I'm the language designer who created the 'Collection Expression' design/specification: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/5354
You can see the entire history of the proposal there. To answer you specific question, we went with `..` because that's what the language already uses for the complimentary 'pattern matching deconstruction' form for collection patterns.
In other words, you can already say this today:
if (x is [var start, .. var middle, .. var end]) { ... }
-
What's new in C# 12: overview
You must specify concrete type.
There was a plan to have "natural type" so "var list = [1,2,3]" would be of type "List" but it was postponed to C# 13 (https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/5354#issuecommen...)
-
Robust Design through Value Objects in C#
While C# currently lacks direct support for this kind of functionality, there's a glimmer of hope with an active proposal under discussion that aims to bring this feature to the language. This potential addition promises a future where C# can natively offer similar robust type narrowing.
-
The combined power of F# and C#
Given few people anticipated ValueTuple and C# adding a more direct tuple syntax, I feel like it is only a matter of time before C# adds discriminated unions.
(There are multiple proposals tracking the idea. This seems the most comprehensive and "central": https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/7016)
-
Should i quit Django and move to asp.net
I always liked list abbreviations in python, but I absolutely love Linq. I believe there is a feature proposal for C# 12, which makes collection initialization better imo.
- Can constructor parameter assignment be made less verbose?
What are some alternatives?
gleam - ⭐️ A friendly language for building type-safe, scalable systems!
language-ext - C# functional language extensions - a base class library for functional programming
crystal - The Crystal Programming Language
jOOQ - jOOQ is the best way to write SQL in Java
fast-ruby - :dash: Writing Fast Ruby :heart_eyes: -- Collect Common Ruby idioms.
SharpLab - .NET language playground
PyCall.jl - Package to call Python functions from the Julia language
SQLDelight - SQLDelight - Generates typesafe Kotlin APIs from SQL
Oberon - Oberon parser, code model & browser, compiler and IDE with debugger
runtimelab - This repo is for experimentation and exploring new ideas that may or may not make it into the main dotnet/runtime repo.
Smalltalk - Parser, code model, interpreter and navigable browser for the original Xerox Smalltalk-80 v2 sources and virtual image file
.NET Runtime - .NET is a cross-platform runtime for cloud, mobile, desktop, and IoT apps.