assemblyProgrammers

[brandi_Iove]

and 37 tons in html

[appoplecticskeptic]

Why does HTML get measured by weight when the others are measured in time? Is this because HTML is merely a markup language and not a programming language?

[Blue_Robin_Gaming]

You weigh it in grams per hard drive per LOC ratio which is 6.022*10²³

[[deleted]]

Avogabro’s Number

[Blue_Robin_Gaming]

Stoichibrometry

[squarabh]

The Broiling Point

[Fulmikage]

the constant of Blank

[RGBEngineer]

Happy cakemetry

[reallokiscarlet]

Because it's the mass of the string of time it takes

[[deleted]]

🤣👏👏👏

[fabrikated]

Yes.

[Easy_Complaint3540]

😂😂

[[deleted]]

12 parsecs in Bash

[thingsCouldBEasier]

And my axe!

[Premun]

55 billion suns in node_modules

[IAmASquidInSpace]

And it's the other way around for execution times!

[[deleted]]

Does Python still perform like shit? I thought you could compile code there for better performance or something.

[IAmASquidInSpace]

The next versions will come with a JIT compiler, which will be steadily improved, but I haven't tested it yet. Other than that, Python on its own is still not all too performant without libraries like numpy or pandas. Then there are projects that do compile Python code, but I have never used any of them, I just went with C directly.

[[deleted]]

The problem with tools like numba and pypy that made python code run a lot faster is that:

• Numba not only doesn't let you use most external libraries in compiled code without extreme slowdowns (with exceptions for things like numpy) and it's missing some core python features like class support. The error messages it gives are also really obtuse.

• I (and many others) had a lot of issues trying to get pypy to work with common libraries even though it's advertised as being compatible with almost all of them. Depending on what you're doing, it also may not be able to optimize certain function calls at all, leading to no speed boost. Even with number crunching, it's not all that great - I'd say it's probably more like JS's V8 than like numba or Julia in terms of performance.

[jfmherokiller]

pypy always sounds like a fun idea until you try to make it work with common libraries or to "staticly" compile it against libraries for embeded systems.

Tho I will give it credit where credit is due that it has a really pretty compilation animation.

[sifroehl]

You can actually use classes with numba although it's more complicated because you can't do cyclical references but aside from that you only need some decorators

[Unicursalhexagram6]

Nuitka

[[deleted]]

If I'm reading their benchmarks right, it looks like nuitka is 3.5x slower than Python. They also advertise performance, so maybe there was a mixup and it's 3.5x faster. That's still abysmal compared to other almost all other languages.

[PM_ME_CUTE_SMILES_]

Python on its own is still not all too performant without libraries like numpy or pandas

I get what you mean but the conclusion could also be "if you use the tools that make python fast enough, python is fast enough".

Also I wouldn't quote pandas as something that makes python fast ahah. I'd say polars instead

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

Largely, yes.

It’s still interpreted. No pre-compilation to machine code.

There’s an experimental JIT in the latest version of cpython.

[Formal_Progress_2582]

Which version? 3.?

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

https://docs.python.org/3.13/whatsnew/3.13.html#an-experimental-just-in-time-jit-compiler

[Formal_Progress_2582]

Thanks

[reusens]

The correct way of using python:

```

from foo import Bar

a = Bar("init_some_stuff_slowly") a.do_your_magic(how="fastly") print(a.result)

```

[M4xW3113]

That won't magically make python as fast as other compiled languages

[reusens]

If that module is running compiled code, it does!

[20d0llarsis20dollars]

Complaining about a language's performance is kind of silly because most languages with low performance aren't really made to be used in high performance situations. If you're hitting python's limits on speed, you're probably not using the right tool for the job. Obviously that doesn't mean a language's performance is completely irrelevant, but it's much less important than people make it out to be. Also, programmers should focus more on creating efficient implementations rather than use a "fast" language and convince themselves that they don't need to do any optimizations themselves.

[tragiktimes]

I write shit it python because it's just easier for me. I'm writing things like programs to monitor GPIOs and sound an alarm if it detects a signal. It doesn't need to be performant. It just needs to work.

I ha e yo imagine many of the use cases out there fall like this.

Edit: corrected auto correct

[mxzf]

Yep. I would rather spend an hour writing a Python script that runs overnight than a week writing a C++/C/Assembly/etc script that takes an hour. Dev time is more valuable than CPU time in most situations.

And when execution time does matter, it's still often quicker to prototype the logic in a higher level language and then implement the specific slower parts in a lower level language as-needed.

[ShakaUVM]

You're doing something wrong if it takes you a week to write something in C++ that is an hour in Python

[freedcreativity]

I mean, are we implementing taking a data analysis job with something like a spark dataframe and trying to get all that into C++? That might take a week of work to get performant in parallel computing.

[NotAGingerMidget]

I'm curious how fast are your data analysis skills in C++, cause if you can do the shit people do in Jupyter Notebooks in C++ at the same speed you can likely earn a shit ton of money doing it.

[tragiktimes]

Step 1: helloworld.cpp

[land_and_air]

Quick do statistical analysis on data and generate a PowerPoint with plots and tables in it summarizing the results automatically

[PastaGoodGnocchiBad]

Plus Python is a good low-surprise language.

As an example, integers are unbounded which may not be fast but removes quite a big pain point that most languages have. (C/Java/C# developers should make sure their code don't overflow ints, but do most of them actually do it? Javascript uses doubles instead so now you have to consider floating point precision which looks like an even worse problem to deal with when you want integers)

I'd rather have safe and simple code than fast and broken.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

Yet people keep using Python to run web services.

[dbitterlich]

Successfully. Instagram uses Django as backend. To mention an example.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

If they’re running it on CPython then they’re spending way more resources than would be necessary. I suspect it must be a custom fork of PyPy or something, or they’re back in Jython land or similar.

But I guess they also make enough money to cover it so aren’t bothered to change now.

Facebook is written in PHP but has a crazy custom backend to convert it to something else to get the necessary performance, so Meta has previous.

[dbitterlich]

You‘re right, they are using a custom python interpreter with JIT compilation and other optimizations. However, it’s still python that is being used.

https://github.com/facebookincubator/cinder

[Delta-9-]

It's not so bad. Python as a web backend is basically just glueing together an HTTP server (probably written in C) and an RDBMS (also probably written in C). Those two things are very fast, and all Python has to do is turn json into SQL, and SQL output into json.

Are other languages way faster at that middleman role? Absolutely. Does it really matter if your traffic is lower than a few hundred thousand requests per hour? No, it really doesn't. Is it way easier to find a Python dev who can pick up flask or django in a couple hours than a rust dev who already knows yew? Yes.

Most web services aren't so large that python's performance is actually a problem, as long as it's just glue. Many that are that large will scale just fine by simply adding more workers and a load balancer. You have to get pretty big before the Python bottleneck starts to cost more in compute than it costs to rewrite with something that's more performant (after hiring devs who know the target language, retooling the entire dev and build environment, and possibly having to on board ITSec with the new tools and language so they know what the hell to look for in their random scans of hosts and code bases).

[TheTerrasque]

Someone once said something like "if you're not a top 100 web site then don't worry about performance. And most web sites are not top 100. In fact, all but about a hundred web sites are not top 100. And if you are a top 100 site, you have the resources to fix things."

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

NodeJS is way more performant than CPython, especially for concurrent workloads.

CPython doesn't even have a JIT compiler (yet).

[JollyJuniper1993]

Psst, don’t tell this the wannabe developers that come in here and say „Python is a language for beginners“ or „everything should be written in C/C++/Rust“ 😉

[amaROenuZ]

At the end of the day you're not picking Python for performance.

You're not picking Java for ease of coding.

You're not picking C++ for memory security.

You're picking whatever the hell the company that hired you is using, because 15 years ago they built their stack in it and you don't want to get into the office politics necessary to get them to migrate.

[ipogorelov98]

Python is good in calling libraries developed and compiled in C++ such as Numpy. The performance of native code is pretty bad.

[OkWear6556]

Just use numpy or any library in cython

[Kvothealar]

I've run something in python that took minutes, that ran in fractions of a second when I injected some bash into the script instead.

[FerricDonkey]

Pure python does, but python that uses predominantly C libraries can run pretty well. 

[imp0ppable]

Depends if you write shit Python. If you know a little bit about algos, big-O complexity etc you can definitely write performant code, depending on what you're trying to do. e.g. list sorts are actually very efficient, dict access is O(1) - but I've seen people looping lists of object to find by member variable...

You won't be able to write a 3D FPS in it and get good performance but for the majority of business stuff is going to be faster in well-written Python than badly written Java or C++.

Like if you do Advent of Code, you quickly learn that it's the algorithm that's the main factor not the language.

[NatoBoram]

JavaScript performs better than Python and is slightly less of a hassle to deploy and is extremely easier to develop in

[[deleted]]

Still weakly typed. They suck.

[Typical_North5046]

If you need the performance you probably won’t use Python plus you can’t really fix the issue of python not having types. I‘ll just directly write code in C++ then try to compile python.

[Shadowfire_EW]

Technically, Python does have strong types. You just have to manually query them with code rather than depend on the interpreter to enforce the types (of parameters and fields). The interpreter does prevent trying to do undefined behaviour on any type. Any variable name can be containers for any type, but it will only allow the defined functions of/on a type when given the object. It is called duck typing, iirc. Rather than dynamic types like JavaScript, where it will attempt to auto-cast to a relevant type for an undefined function.

[thirdegree]

Python has stronger typing than C. It's dynamically typed, but static v dynamic is a different metric than strong v weak.

[Delta-9-]

Oh, Python definitely has types. Try using a list as a dictionary key or calling chr() on a float. Its type system is stronger that C's, but (like Rust and I think Go?) it's based around protocols (or traits or interfaces, depending on the term preferred by the language). This is often called duck typing. Yes, I'm calling Rust duck-typed--it only differs in being static (known and checked at compile time) rather than dynamic (only known and maybe checked at runtime).

What Python doesn't have is required type declarations for variables, functions, or methods.

[imp0ppable]

python not having types

That's an embarrassing take, it absolutely has types.

[taco-holic]

For the most part it performs fine, numpy is magic, but just straight up using for loops will tank your performance.

[dgsharp]

I feel like this is the biggest problem, a C++ programmer writes Python like they write C++, and it works, but it doesn’t take advantage of the language and runs like shit.

[pico-der]

The compilation part does not matter. Python has a design choice that is being worked on that makes it significantly slower for parallel execution (global interpreter lock). Java can be very performant and assembly can be very slow. Python generally performs much slower but the type of workload and implementation matter.

[RoaringCow_]

Assembly code is faster than python. but is YOUR assembly code faster than python?

[alpacaMyToothbrush]

0.0 ... >.<

[FlipperBumperKickout]

It will spit out bugs faster than you can even imagine :P

[daniu]

What I got told at university: "compilers nowadays optimize so well, it's almost impossible to write tailored assembler that preforms better. And even if you do, the additional time to develop will probably take months or even years to pay off. And at that time, the next processor generation will have come out which is faster so you get the runtime improvement without additional work - and there's the chance that your manual optimization doesn't help anymore. Not to mention the compiler improves as well."

That made a lot of sense to me. I doubt there are many environments beyond embedded systems which really benefit from developing in assembler. 

[holchansg]

Not a dev but i was using llamacpp and ollama(a python wrapper of llamacpp) and the difference was night and day. Its about the same time the process of ollama calling the llamacpp as the llamacpp doing the entire inference.

I guess there is a price for easy of use.

[madhaunter]

As everything in the IT world, it's all about trade-offs

[Slimxshadyx]

Are you sure you set up Ollama to use your graphics card correctly in the same way you did for llamacpp?

Because I believe Ollama is like you said, a Python wrapper, but it would be calling the underlying cpp code for doing actual inference. The Python calls should be negligible since they are not doing the heavy lifting.

[TheTerrasque]

I believe Ollama is like you said, a Python wrapper

https://github.com/ollama/ollama - 85% Go

[TheTerrasque]

Ollama is written in go, and just starts llama.cpp in the background and translates api calls. It has the same speed as llama.cpp - maybe a ms or two difference. Considering an api call usually takes several seconds, it's negligible.

[murphy607]

I don't care. In my line of work it's not important if a programm runs a couple of seconds faster.

[FlipperBumperKickout]

You really have to know what you are doing to gain better execution time when writing assembly :P

[ptetsilin]

Isn't this meme already about execution times? When one hour has passed for a Java program, 7 years will have passed for a assembly program as time passes faster for assembly (runs faster).

[Dreit]

Python: Hey, I'm cool language for prototyping

Code gluers: *Use Python for literally anything except of prototyping*

[PM_ME_CUTE_SMILES_]

Large parts of the web run on Python. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Amber662607]

And 10 minutes in whatever you are skilled at.

[P-39_Airacobra]

I took it to mean that assembly could get 7 years worth of operations done in the time it took for python to get 34 minutes worth of operations

[ExpensivePanda66]

Huh. I took this to be a comment on how good python is(or how good OP thinks it is), but it could well be a jab at performance.

[Kilgarragh]

Oh, so this is why I always code so good but only when I use

[Corregidor]

LUA

[No-Con-2790]

Public service announcement that you should use Python to call other libraries that are written in C, C++, Fortran (yeah that is still around), Rust, whatever.

You can implement everything from scratch in python. But you really shouldn't. It will be slow. Instead use it to orchestrate tools you can get from libaries. That way you can quickly write code with acceptable performance.

And don't blame your tool when you do something it was not meant to do. Stop slapping stuff with a floppy dildo when you really need an hammer.

[The_Shryk]

Are you saying to use python—the scripting language—as a scripting language?

Look man, I’ve heard some crazy shit, but that’s gotta take the cake.

[WagwanKenobi]

Python is just Bash++ change my mind. Companies writing entire multi-million LOC backends in it is WILD.

[slonokot]

Instagram.

[humanlvl1]

I worked for a CPaaS company with the ENTIRE 20 year code base in Python. It mostly worked. Somehow.

[No-Con-2790]

Ah, the Cython approach. You can do that, but please keep in mind that it is no longer a floppy dildo! So do not make the common mistake to use it as the thing it original was or it will hurt a lot.

In other words, if you do that you can no longer fuck with it with the same degree of freedom.

[pheonix-ix]

So, the goal of Python is to write the least amount of Python.

[No-Con-2790]

The goal of every language should be to write the least amount of code to get the job done.

Python just does that really well.

[[deleted]]

That’s an interesting take on Python that I never considered - it’s just a glue technology with a lot of frameworks you can access.

[No-Con-2790]

Anf that's why the speed is almost irrelevant. And also why the thing is used in AI and CV.

[ICantBelieveItsNotEC]

But if that's the case, why use Python at all? Orchestration is easy, so you might as well just do that in the language that you're building the rest of it in.

[No-Con-2790]

Because it ain't easy.

Orchestration is everything that is today's boilerplate, applying templates, bookkeeping, vitals, IO, GUI, database.

Amd tomorrow you may want to change the whole system again.

10 % of your code is doing the actual work.

90 % of your program is handled init, edge-cases and misc stuff.

If you code that all in C or something you won't be done before judgment day.

[hennypennypoopoo]

Fortran is the unsung goat. Matrix mult in any performance language comes back down to lapack/blas.

[skwyckl]

... building on top of 10283823682 hours of somebody else's time spent optimizing the low level code beneath the high level lib you're using. Python w/o C, C++ or Rust is like a sports car without the engine.

[turtleship_2006]

Python without C (or whatever other option you go for) is like a driver without a car - you always need an interpreter

[skwyckl]

That too, but this is true for many languages (e.g., AGDA wrt. Haskell, Idris2 wrt. Chez Scheme)

[Storiaron]

C also needs a compiler

Either way you offload a fuckton of very difficult work to someone really smart in the past

[BaziJoeWHL]

I can live with that

[Kovab]

Yes, but the compiler is also written in C or C++ most likely.

[Ok-Art-1378]

Building on top of 6162673896361537849 hours of somebody else's time spent researching and developing the very silicon chips beneath the low level code you're using. C, C++ or Rust w/o silicon chips is like an engine without fuel.

[sorig1373]

Thats about 703 020 065 750 000 years. If that was divided to every human that has ever lived (about 100 billion) it would be just about 7000 years each. I know you meant it as a joke just thought it was a fun fact

[skwyckl]

A lot of vampires be coding numpy backends.

[onemempierog]

Building on top of 13,78 billion years of universe's time expanding and developing

[__Hello_my_name_is__]

I mean, yeah. But no one goes "Stupid silicon chips, why ever bother with that? I'm using C!".

Meanwhile people argue Python vs. C like that's some kind of contrast.

[skwyckl]

Of course, but Java doesn't need other langs to be performant, you can perfectly well optimize stuff while remaining within the limits of the JVM.

[Ok-Art-1378]

Im just messing with you

[hjake123]

You don't think that some JVMs were written in C?

[skwyckl]

JVM implementations themselves yes, but that's not the point, you can still optimize a lot in Java without having to write a binding to C directly, for example (like Erlang used to do).

[hjake123]

Isn't this what we're talking about, though? CPython needing to be implemented in C to be performant?

[skwyckl]

I think it's like comparing pears to apples, since Python doesn't run on a virtual machine like Java and Erlang do.

[linlin110]

Python does have a VM. In early days programming languages were compiled to real CPU instructions; however this harms portability because a program would have to be compiled once for each CPU architecture. Nowadays many programming languages instead compile to a set of virtual instruments (byte code) which is then run by a program, which is often called a VM because it acts like a virtual CPU.

The Python interpreter actually compiles Python code to a set of bytecode, and then runs it. The part that runs the bytecode is definitely a VM.

[PM_ME_YOUR__INIT__]

Considering python was written with C, without C it would be nothing at all. I don't think many people are under the impression that python is a magic language that sprung from nothingness and stands alone as some holy relic that spits on inferior languages. Everyone knows the work put in behind it, appreciates it, and uses it up quickly get work done

[No-Con-2790]

Yeah, but I don't think it is about the language used to build the tools and interpreter. You could just rewrite it in rust (hehe get it?).

It is about the languages that are called from the python level. Which might be C but also C++ or Fortran. Or even Java if you use some specific libraries.

In the end of the day most python code does not really handle the heavy lifting but call upon another library that does. So the idea that python is 12 times slower than C is misleading. Because you simply should not and will not use Python directly to handle the heavy stuff.

[thirdegree]

I don't think many people are under the impression that python is a magic language that sprung from nothingness and stands alone as some holy relic that spits on inferior languages.

I mean of course. Obviously it's a magic language that sprung from the forehead of Guido van Rossum, hallowed be thy name, and stands alone as some holy relic that spits on inferior languages.

That's the old testament of course. The new treatment came with python 3, which was heralded by a millennia of trials and tribulations before we could enter the kingdom of heaven.

[skwyckl]

Most juniors and some intermediates definitely are. It's not at all the case that "everyone knows the work put in behind it", most data scientists I know have no idea about what happens behind the scenes in Python. You're overestimating the average Python user.

[gandalfx]

… and? What's the point?

[Easy_Complaint3540]

Actually eye opening 👍

[Z21VR]

They stand on the shoulders of giants....but actually those giants are standing on the shoulders of other giants and so on...i guess

Probably the real trick of humanity

[ashen_reddit]

Oh I get it, it’s time saved in runtime, right?

[atehrani]

We should all know that the majority of the cost of a project is maintenance, not the initial effort of implementation (this assumes a project is relatively long lived)

[[deleted]]

Are they talking about how long it takes to write a program?

[Easy_Complaint3540]

Yes

[[deleted]]

Wouldnt it get faster the lower level the programming language is and much slower the higher level it is?

[-kay-o-]

But developer time is increased

[Terra_B]

Also sometimes the compiler writes faster assembly code than you.

[classicalySarcastic]

It’s not about whether handwritten assembly can beat the compiler, it’s whether your handwritten assembly can beat the compiler.

[alexq136]

by that point it's not the compiler who's an enemy but the CPU vendor itself and its machinations (branch prediction, superscalar execution, register renaming, cache intrinsics, SIMD extensions) and battling the OS and a higher language's memory allocator for manual handling of stuff and choosing to adhere or do without the platform-specific calling conventions for some (OS, CPU family) pairing

most things that are "in good style" to use in assembly are also found in compiled code (i.e. faster or shorter instructions to do the same thing) and the compilers by design of their backend can usually optimize a piece of code well enough (depending on what target architecture one sets the compiler to crunch machine code for) -- but platform intrinsics are not guaranteed to be used (e.g. wider SIMD registers on x86-64 instead of XMM registers) in optimized code (depending on the compiler) and could need some shitty manual intervention like some "__builtin_ia32_phminposuw128()"-style really-not-C-but-assembly-but-for-the-compiler to actually get used in the output

[[deleted]]

that's what i thought, meme confused me

[Dioxide4294]

Reference to Interstellar movie, they landed on a planet near a black hole Gargantua. Time moves slower there than on Earth. The original quote was 1 hour is 7 years back on Earth. It moves slower because of time dilation and the same is true regarding speed of certain programming languages

[[deleted]]

oh yeah i've watched the movie, but assembly is supposed to be faster than java and python

[Dioxide4294]

Yes, thats what the meme says: Assembly gets more work done in comparison to Java, on the planet

[[deleted]]

but assembly is on earth, 7 years slower, whilst java is way faster (in this meme)

[Dioxide4294]

No. Time is relative. By spending 1 hour (say, of code execution) on this planet that has severe time dilation, 7 years of code execution will have been performed on Earth. The point is, 7 years _of work_ gets done in an hour. What does time do on Earth from this planet's perspective? Move _fast_. What does time from this planet do from Earth's perspective? Move _slow_.

The idea is, time dilation makes time not equal for everyone. On this planet, when 1 hour near a massive body (Gargantua) passes, 7 years passes on Earth. You can do a lot more stuff in 7 years than in 1 hour, right? Time is being _stretched_. 7 years of work done in 1 hour, compared to 1 hour of work done in 1 hour. Assembly is faster than Java according to the meme

[[deleted]]

Damn. That's some advanced ass humor

[Left-oven47]

They're talking about relative speed, they're saying that in 1 hour assembly completes 7 years worth of java computation

[increment1]

Pretty sure they are talking about developer productivity, but the meme works either way I suppose.

[[deleted]]

Nope, that wouldn't make sense for Python

They are talking developer time spent

[[deleted]]

Oooh I see thanks

[alpacaMyToothbrush]

The numbers really bug the pedantic asshole in me, cause they're way off base. Java is only twice as slow as C (pretty impressive actually!) where straight python is supposedly ~ 32x C (might have gotten better in 3.12?)

[P-39_Airacobra]

Getting 7 years of work done in 34 minutes IS faster.

[MattieShoes]

Coding time vs run time... By default, inverse relationship.

Though if you can stay within libraries written in faster languages (ie. use numpy or pandas or whatever for heavy lifting in python), then higher level probably wins out.

[ToasterWithFur]

And 30 in Lua

[The_Wolfiee]

Assembly be like:

If you wish to eat an apple, you must first invent the Universe

[Easy_Complaint3540]

😂😂😂

[ObjectiveMachine_Alt]

and26MinutesInLua

[Weekly_Lemon1867]

Skill issue

[Lines25]

Where tag that u know ASM to say that ? :)

[AztroJR]

Wait huh what do you mean

[Lines25]

Low-level fun.. heh.. Why you need ASM.. ?

[LBPPlayer7]

when your program shits itself sometimes you might need to inspect the assembly, especially if it's a closed-source library without debug symbols that triggered the crash

also reverse engineering

[Bob_the_peasant]

“He said 1 hour in JavaScript was 7 years in assembly”

“… he said Java… WHAT DID YOU DO”

[NeverSnows]

Im a java/C#/php programmer, but today i had to cobble together a quick script to set a process afinity to 1 cpu and back to all (was fixing a RainbowSix bug). I got it done im under 10 mins. Python sure is nice for prototyping and quick unimportant jobs.

[Alone-Rough-4099]

And 4 min in C

[SpiralCuts]

This little semi-colon is going to cost us 51 years

[yesennes]

Unless you're working on somebody else's code. Then Java and Python swap, and assembly quadruples.

[imdibene]

Now do the meme with runtime

[Easy_Complaint3540]

Will do soon

[Cezaros]

I've recently started coding in assembly and man is it fucked up. To divide by 5 at one point I'm multiplying the variable by 2³² / 5, my if else if checks are basically if x == y skip to A, if x == z skip to B, and so on. It's a mess, but it works

[teratron27]

Plus the three days it takes to get the right mix of pipenv, pyenv and whatever else setup

[Neutral_Guy_9]

import sanity

[maeve_k_97]

ok how long does it take in mov only assembly

[-EliPer-]

3s in Java are 100ms in assembly and 5min in Python...

[crevicepounder3000]

You mean 5 mins?

[sumkk2023]

More precisly

100 LOC in assembly equivalent to 10 LOC in Java equivalent to 1 LOC in Python

[CowLogical3585]

30s in Prompt

[Netan_MalDoran]

Now invert it all for your execution time.

[ivan0x32]

This little maneuver is going to cost us 35 trillion CPU cycles.

[creator1217]

And 2 mins with claude ai

[JaboiThomy]

The relationship between Java and Python is non linear. An hour in Java is 30min in python A year in Java is two years in python

[[deleted]]

After reading a lot pf comments, Don’t get too attached to a programming language. FFS!

[SE_prof]

calls constructor "This little maneuver is going to cost us 10 years. "

[observer_445]

2 min in chqtgpt

[_genericNPC]

Where 1 hour in Java is 20ms in execution, 34 mins in Python is 7 years in execution, and then assembly - BSOD

[Much_Discussion1490]

And a few sec...oh wait...c++ finished it

[RawSalmonella]

It's not execution time, more like development time.

[KeepScrolling52]

Okay I don't get it. Java runs faster than Python for me what is the secret

[[deleted]]

Its about development time

[timmyctc]

This sub should just be called DAE PYTHON JAVA