Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Register
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
F
fluiddyn_papers
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Wiki
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Snippets
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Container Registry
Model registry
Operate
Environments
Monitor
Incidents
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Terms and privacy
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
fluiddyn
fluiddyn_papers
Commits
221c57143917
Commit
221c57143917
authored
4 years ago
by
Pierre Augier
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Serge's email
parent
ced4a590ceb7
No related branches found
Branches containing commit
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
reply_Zwart2020/correspondence.md
+11
-12
11 additions, 12 deletions
reply_Zwart2020/correspondence.md
with
11 additions
and
12 deletions
reply_Zwart2020/correspondence.md
+
11
−
12
View file @
221c5714
...
...
@@ -13,9 +13,9 @@
Zwart recently published in Nature Astronomy a comment on
**
The ecological
impact of high-performance computing in astrophysics
**
\c
ite{Zwart2020}. The
main claim is that the Python programming language represents an issue for the
climate and should be avoided. We
will show
that scientific programs written in
climate and should be avoided. We
advocate
that scientific programs written in
Python can be very efficient and energy friendly. We argue that human factors
and education are much more important than the choice of languages.
To support his idea, Zwart presents a benchmark on the N-Body problem with a
very inefficient implementation in Python, running 50 times slower than a C++
...
...
@@ -17,9 +17,9 @@
Python can be very efficient and energy friendly. We argue that human factors
and education are much more important than the choice of languages.
To support his idea, Zwart presents a benchmark on the N-Body problem with a
very inefficient implementation in Python, running 50 times slower than a C++
implementation
!
As Python users concerned about our ecological impact, we
implementation
.
As Python users concerned about our ecological impact, we
worked on similar benchmarks on the same problem[^1]. In contrast to Zwart, we
(i) also consider efficient implementations in Python and Julia and (ii)
properly measure the energy consumption with dedicated hardware equipped with
...
...
@@ -35,8 +35,8 @@
Python is one of the most used and loved languages for science and data
analysis[^3]. Python is a dynamic programming language oriented towards
communication between humans and fast prototyping. Reading and writing Python
is very accessible and do not require a long training. It is generalist
(quite
good for very
different tasks) and was designed to increase developers
is very accessible and do not require a long training. It is generalist
(seemingly suited to
different tasks) and was designed to increase developers
productivity. There are strong open-source communities using Python and a rich
scientific ecosystem of several efficient libraries.
...
...
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
[
Github reports
](
https://octoverse.github.com/
)
or the
[
Stack Overflow Annual
Developer Survey
](
https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey
)
.
It is worth
to
understand that characterizing a language as being "compiled" or
It is worth understand
ing
that characterizing a language as being "compiled" or
"interpreted" is a language abuse: these categories make sense only for
specific implementations of languages. Moreover, some interpreters of dynamic
languages (for example Julia or Matlab) actually compile parts of the code on
...
...
@@ -112,8 +112,8 @@
implementation. The implementation labelled "Pythran naive" (simple Numpy code
accelerated only by decorating one function with
`@transonic.jit`
\c
ite{transonic}) is only 3 times slower than the Fortran implementation. (3)
All Python implementations are simpler to reason, read and write than the
C++
and Fortran implementations.
All Python implementations are simpler to reason
about
, read and write than the
C++
and Fortran implementations.
For comparison, we also consider three implementations in Julia (blue circles):
the implementation labelled "Julia" is comparable with the "Pythran" and
...
...
@@ -141,11 +141,10 @@
consumption. They should also know how to profile their codes to discover which
parts can potentially be optimized. Therefore, money and time should be
invested on educating students and scientists. This benchmark demonstrates that
Python is actually a good solution to easily obtain good performance with
simple and readable codes. Therefore, teaching efficient Python to scientists
and engineers can be profitable to minimize the overall ecological impact of
computing. Of course, other languages have their own strengths and are more
adapted than Python for specific tasks.
Python can actually be a good solution to easily obtain good performance with
simple and readable codes. Therefore, education and tooling can be profitable
to minimize the overall ecological impact of computing, whatever the underlying
language.
\b
ibliographystyle{naturemag}
\b
ibliography{./pubs}
\ No newline at end of file
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment