程序设计语言的能量消耗分析:一个实证研究

Stefanos Georgiou, M. Kechagia, D. Spinellis
{"title":"程序设计语言的能量消耗分析:一个实证研究","authors":"Stefanos Georgiou, M. Kechagia, D. Spinellis","doi":"10.1145/3139367.3139418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Motivation: The energy efficiency of it-related products, from the software perspective, has gained vast popularity the recent years and paved a new emerging research field. However, there is limited number of research works regarding the energy consumption of relatively small programming tasks. This knowledge is critical to be known especially in cases where millions of small tasks are running in parallel on multiple devices all around the globe. Goal: In this preliminary study, we aim to identify energy implications of small, independent tasks developed in different programming languages; compiled, semi-compiled, and interpreted ones. Method: To achieve our purpose, we collected, refined, compared, and analyzed a number of implemented tasks from Rosetta Code, that is a publicly available Repository for programming chrestomathy. Results: Our analysis shows that among compiled programming languages such as C, C++, Java, and Go offer the highest energy efficiency for all of our tested tasks compared to C#, VB.Net, and Rust. Regarding interpreted programming languages PHP, Ruby, and JavaScript exhibit the most energy savings compared to Swift, R, Perl, and Python.","PeriodicalId":436862,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 21st Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyzing Programming Languages' Energy Consumption: An Empirical Study\",\"authors\":\"Stefanos Georgiou, M. Kechagia, D. Spinellis\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3139367.3139418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Motivation: The energy efficiency of it-related products, from the software perspective, has gained vast popularity the recent years and paved a new emerging research field. However, there is limited number of research works regarding the energy consumption of relatively small programming tasks. This knowledge is critical to be known especially in cases where millions of small tasks are running in parallel on multiple devices all around the globe. Goal: In this preliminary study, we aim to identify energy implications of small, independent tasks developed in different programming languages; compiled, semi-compiled, and interpreted ones. Method: To achieve our purpose, we collected, refined, compared, and analyzed a number of implemented tasks from Rosetta Code, that is a publicly available Repository for programming chrestomathy. Results: Our analysis shows that among compiled programming languages such as C, C++, Java, and Go offer the highest energy efficiency for all of our tested tasks compared to C#, VB.Net, and Rust. Regarding interpreted programming languages PHP, Ruby, and JavaScript exhibit the most energy savings compared to Swift, R, Perl, and Python.\",\"PeriodicalId\":436862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 21st Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 21st Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3139367.3139418\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 21st Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3139367.3139418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

动机:从软件角度来看,it相关产品的能效问题近年来得到了广泛的普及,并开辟了一个新兴的研究领域。然而,关于相对较小的编程任务的能耗的研究工作数量有限。了解这些知识非常重要,特别是在全球多个设备上并行运行数百万个小任务的情况下。目标:在这项初步研究中,我们的目标是确定用不同编程语言开发的小型独立任务的能源影响;编译的、半编译的和解释的。方法:为了达到我们的目的,我们从Rosetta Code中收集、改进、比较和分析了许多已实现的任务,Rosetta Code是一个公开可用的编程库。结果:我们的分析表明,与c#、VB相比,在C、c++、Java和Go等编译型编程语言中,为我们所有的测试任务提供了最高的能效。Net和Rust。关于解释型编程语言,PHP、Ruby和JavaScript比Swift、R、Perl和Python更节能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analyzing Programming Languages' Energy Consumption: An Empirical Study
Motivation: The energy efficiency of it-related products, from the software perspective, has gained vast popularity the recent years and paved a new emerging research field. However, there is limited number of research works regarding the energy consumption of relatively small programming tasks. This knowledge is critical to be known especially in cases where millions of small tasks are running in parallel on multiple devices all around the globe. Goal: In this preliminary study, we aim to identify energy implications of small, independent tasks developed in different programming languages; compiled, semi-compiled, and interpreted ones. Method: To achieve our purpose, we collected, refined, compared, and analyzed a number of implemented tasks from Rosetta Code, that is a publicly available Repository for programming chrestomathy. Results: Our analysis shows that among compiled programming languages such as C, C++, Java, and Go offer the highest energy efficiency for all of our tested tasks compared to C#, VB.Net, and Rust. Regarding interpreted programming languages PHP, Ruby, and JavaScript exhibit the most energy savings compared to Swift, R, Perl, and Python.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信