Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 9503b1bf118e authored by Pierre Augier's avatar Pierre Augier
Browse files

reply_editor_NA.md

parent 22d304bc8854
No related branches found
No related tags found
1 merge request!5First modifications to take care of the editor remarks
......@@ -11,8 +11,15 @@
Figures 1 and 3, all along section 3 "The role of language on the ecology" and
in the conclusions. We rewrote the first paragraph which is now:
"..."
"Zwart recently published in Nature Astronomy a comment on The ecological
impact of high-performance computing in astrophysics \cite{Zwart2020}. The
take-home message is that scientists should be mindfull of their carbon
footprint and we fully agree. One of the proposed solution is to avoid the
Python programming language. We advocate that it would be counterproductive and
that scientific programs written in Python can be efficient and energy
friendly. We argue that advancement of compiler technology, human factors and
education are much more important than choice of language."
Regarding the length of our text, we tried to reduce it by rewording and
cutting unnecessary words. You suggested to remove the first half of the
paragraph on compiled/interpreted language and JIT/AOT compilation. We
......@@ -15,11 +22,11 @@
Regarding the length of our text, we tried to reduce it by rewording and
cutting unnecessary words. You suggested to remove the first half of the
paragraph on compiled/interpreted language and JIT/AOT compilation. We
decreased the length of this paragraph but with think that it is actually
useful to recall that this is not languages that are "compiled" and
"interpreted" but only implementations. This distinction between "compiled" and
"interpreted" languages is very common and is at the base of Zwart conclusions
on Python. Moreover, we anyway need to explain the difference between JIT and
AOT compilations. We now write:
decreased the length of this paragraph but we think that it is actually useful
to recall that languages are not "interpreted" or "compiled". Only
implementations of languages interpret or/and compile code. This distinction
between "interpreted languages" and "compiled languages" is very common and is
at the base of Zwart conclusions on Python. Moreover, we anyway need to
introduce the acronyms JIT and AOT. We now write:
......@@ -25,3 +32,9 @@
"..."
"Zwart (2020) characterizes languages as being “interpreted” or “compiled” but
these categories make sense only for specific implementations. Some
interpreters compile parts of the code during the execution (just-in-time
compilation, JIT) \cite{aycock2003brief} and dynamic languages can also be
compiled ahead-of-time (AOT). However, the most standard way to execute Python
code is to interpret it with the reference implementation called CPython. Due
to the lack of a built-in JIT compiler, CPython is relatively slow."
......@@ -27,2 +40,5 @@
We also took into account your other pieces of advice.
In total, with the slightly longer opening paragraph and no footnotes, the full
text is approximately 140 words shorter. We also took into account your other
pieces of advice. We hope that this manuscript can be suitable for publication
in this state.
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment