HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
greensoftwarelab
Energy-Languages
C2017–2024
greensoftwarelab / Energy-Languages

Energy-Languages

The complete set of tools for energy consumption analysis of programming languages, using Computer Language Benchmark Game

15Distinct people
23Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
713GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

The complete set of tools for energy consumption analysis of programming languages, using Computer Language Benchmark Game

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 9:01:12 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year23 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-09-14 21:42:40 UTC to 2024-01-26 10:14:29 UTC.

024682017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments20172018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 0 submissions, 5 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 8 mentions; 0 submissions, 8 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC505
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC808
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

8 sources
One of the JavaScript programs at least was concurrent, whereas the TypeScript equivalent was synchronous. No wonder there's a difference... Haven't looked closely at the other problems, but it's apparent to me that the solutions are not even trying to be similar, so comparing their efficiency is near useless. the problem in question was the k-nucleotide one, IIRC: https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages/blob/13...
In Energy Efficiency across Programming Languages (2017) [pdf]
The code from this study is here: https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages From looking at the code snippets, a big issue with this study becomes clear - it doesn't reflect how languages like Python are used in practice. In practice, the "hot loops" of Python are in c/c++/fortran/cython/numba/... i.e. Python code usually makes use of a vast ecosystem of optimized science/maths/data science libraries. Whereas the study code is mainly using pure Python. It's an issue with the methodology that the programs are written specifically for this study; creating an artificial situation.
In Energy Efficiency across Programming Languages (2017) [pdf]
> Your "painstakingly optimized with SIMD" doesn't apply much to those 4 year old programs. What's this then? https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages/blob/ma... There are some explicit SIMD instructions, and some programs written to allow autovectorization. > Never throw the baby out with the bath water. /eyeroll There's no baby. There's no significant investment in applying equal levels of optimizations to the programs across languages. TypeScript vs JavaScript is a telling example but hardly the only one.
In Sustainability with Rust
> > It's based on The Computer Language Benchmarks Game… > It's based on these 4 year old programs —https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages Yes, that repo's blurb confirms what I said: "The complete set of tools for energy consumption analysis of programming languages, using Computer Language Benchmark Game" If you were making some other point, I missed it. As for the programs being four years old, the paper was published in 2017, so that's exactly as expected... > > … no one bothered to cp fast-solution.js fast-solution.ts. > Perhaps figuring out correct type annotations was too much of a barrier. Sure, the details don't interest me. The point is that these two languages with identical compilers (TypeScript gets translated to JavaScript, discarding you're annotations) show wildly different scores, which makes it impossible t
Read the rest
o take any of these numbers too seriously.
In Sustainability with Rust

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.