countwords
gccontent-benchmark
| countwords | gccontent-benchmark | |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 8 | |
| 4 | 55 | |
| - | - | |
| 2.6 | 0.0 | |
| 6 months ago | over 1 year ago | |
| Rust | Rust | |
| MIT License | MIT License |
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.
countwords
- Are there benchmark results of current Forth implementations (interpreted & compiled)?
-
Open any file as bytes
See an example: https://github.com/kimono-koans/countwords/blob/master/rust/fast-simple/main.rs
-
I/O is no longer the bottleneck
this is truly 1978 all over again. No flame graphs, no hardware counters no bottleneck analysis. Using these 'optimizations' for job interviews is questionable at best.
[1] https://benhoyt.com/writings/count-words/
-
Correct name for word matching problem
This might actually be interesting to you: https://benhoyt.com/writings/count-words/
-
Performance comparison: counting words in Python, C/C++, Awk, Rust, and more
In case anyone is interested, I did an optimized, but much more simple, Rust implementation just today[0], which is faster than the optimized implementation on my machine. No indexing into arrays of bytes, etc., no "code golf" measures.
Looks like idiomatic Rust, which I think is interesting. Shows there is more than one way to skin a cat.
[0]: https://github.com/kimono-koans/countwords/blob/master/rust/...
gccontent-benchmark
-
OCaml 5.0 release (including multicore and effects)
So, can someone send me a PR with an OCaml implementation of "my" gc-content benchmark?
https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark
:D
-
Performance comparison: counting words in Python, C/C++, Awk, Rust, and more
Fun stuff! Has run a similar thing with a simple bioinformatics problem before (calculating the ratio of G and Cs against A+G+C+T):
https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark#readme
Really hard - or impossible - to arrive at a definitive single number for one language, but the whole exercise is a lot of fun and quite informative IMO :)
- Benchmarking different programming languages for a simple bioinformatics task
- CSP slower?
-
Performance comparison: counting words in Python, Go, C++, C, AWK, Forth, and Rust
might also enjoy this benchmark for bioinformatics, had a number of community-member submissions https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark
- Rust tops bioinformatics micro-benchmark
What are some alternatives?
countwords - Playing with counting word frequencies (and performance) in various languages.
countwords - Playing with counting word frequencies (and performance) in various languages.
fasten - :construction_worker: Fasten toolkit, for streaming operations on fastq files
robin-hood-hashing - Fast & memory efficient hashtable based on robin hood hashing for C++11/14/17/20
language-benchmarks - A simple benchmark system for compiled and interpreted languages.
huniq - Filter out duplicates on the command line. Replacement for `sort | uniq` optimized for speed (10x faster) when sorting is not needed.
s3-rust-noodles-bam - Rust+AWS+S3+Lambda+Noodles = Serverless Bioinformatics
countwords - Playing with counting word frequencies (and performance) in various languages.
ftx - FTX Sample Code
fast-sqlite3-inserts - Some bunch of test scripts to generate a SQLite DB with 1B rows in fastest possible way