|
|
|
|
|
by emeryberger
616 days ago
|
|
Those papers say "language" over and over again, in the titles, in the body of the text. That work confounds languages and their implementations, and make it sound like there is a one-to-one connection between the two (of course, there is not necessarily such a correspondence). With respect to Ruby vs. JRuby: my student just checked and verified that some but not all of the benchmarks are implemented differently (k-nucleotide, mandelbrot, pidigits, spectral-norm). |
|
Yes they do! And over and over again in-context we sensibly read that to mean what you wish to term more precisely "language implementation".
> Fig. 4 Fig. 5 "We are in fact comparing implementations of programming languages, not the languages themselves."
They know. They just prefer shorter names.
Here's their short-name precise-name lookup table:
https://sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages/se...