Why Make It Complicated

When someone asks if you know any programming paradigm beyond OOP, and your brain immediately goes to "FU"... which conveniently stands for "Functional Programming." The perfect accidental programmer comeback! After 15 years of watching junior devs make everything an object, I've learned that sometimes the best answer to "how should we architect this?" is indeed just "FU." Pure functions, no side effects, and immutability - it's like telling your stateful code to take a hike.

Looking at that isEven function hurts my soul on a spiritual level. Someone's literally checking if a number is even by hard-coding individual cases (0 is even, 1 is odd, 2 is even, 3 is odd...) instead of just using the modulo operator ( return num % 2 === 0 ). And they're doing this while casually flying 30,000 feet in the air with a gorgeous view! The perfect combo of terrible code and flex. My sanity would jump out that window faster than you can say "runtime complexity."

Content Follow Princioa Consultant Software Architect Team Leader S 30 a Forens S What Are the Greenest Programming Languages: This paper presents a study of the runtime, memory usage, and energy consumotion of twentvseven welcknown sottware lanGuages. We monitor the perormance or such languages using ten cnnerencorograminino problems, expressed in each of the languages. Our results show interesting findings, such as slower faster languages consuming less more energy, and now memo usage marlences enero consumotion. we show now to use ou results to provide software engineers support to decide which language to use when energy efficiency is a concern This study implemented 10 benchmark problems in 27 different programming languages and measure execution time, energy consumption, and peak memo use C is the most efficient programming language, while Python and Perl are the least environmental friendly programming languages Link: https:Inkd.indnyrcdGd engineers programming sottware language energy sustainabilty (c) C (c) Rust (c) C (c) Ada (v) Java (c) Pascal (c) Chapel (v) Lisp (c) Ocaml (c) Fortran (c) Swift (c) Haskell (v) C (c) Go (G) Dart (v) F (i) JavaScript (v) Racket (i) TypeScript (i Hack (i) PHP (y) Erlang (i) Lua (i) Jruby (a) Ruby (i) Python ( Perl Energy 1.00 1.03 1.34 1.70 1.98 2.14 2.18 2.27 2.40 2.52 2.79 3.10 3.14 3.23 3.83 4.13 4.45 7.91 21.50 24.02 29.30 42.23 45.98 46.54 69.91 75.88 79.58 C0 Venkatesh Madi and 4.999 others 397 comments

Content When you declare properties and don't typedef TypeScript Wait, That's illegal. JavaScript COWABUNGA IT IS ProdrammerHumor.io

The eternal dilemma of function design perfectly illustrated on an IQ bell curve. The low-IQ crowd (0.1%) and high-IQ geniuses (0.1%) agree: "Just add a new function." Meanwhile, the average devs (34%) in the middle are sweating bullets, desperately clinging to their sacred principle of code reuse: "NO WE SHOULD ADD ANOTHER PARAMETER AND REUSE CODE!" It's the horseshoe theory of programming - both extremes of the intelligence spectrum somehow reach the same conclusion while the "well-actually" crowd in the middle is busy creating those monstrous functions with 17 optional parameters, 9 of which are booleans. And they wonder why nobody wants to maintain their code...

Content 3rd - Follow Software Engineer 3d 4 In 2021 a research paper was published showing most efficient programming languages. Paper is here, but sadly behind the paywall. Gotta love "free academic pursuit" where they take in public money and then hide the results. https:Inkd.ingFTCtMzU Anyway: It shows that if people care about energy footprint of their systems, they need to ditch things like ruby, python and perl. Typescript also is super inefficient too. (e) C (e) Rust (e) C (e) Ada (v) Java (e) Pascal (c) Chapel (v) Lisp (c) Ocaml (c) Fortran (e) Swift (c) Haskell (v) C (e) Go (i) Dart (v) F 6) JavaScript (v) Racket (i) TypeScript (i) Hack 6) PHP (v) Erlang G) Lua (i) Jruby G) Ruby G) Python G) Perl Energy 1.00 1.03 1.34 1.70 1.98 2.14 2.18 2.27 2.40 2.52 2.79 3.10 3.14 3.23 3.83 4.13 4.45 7.91 21.50 24.02 29.30 42.23 45.98 46.54 69.91 75.88 79.58 (c) C (c) Rust (e) C (e) Ada (v) Java (c) Chapel (c) Go (c) Pascal (c) Ocaml (v) C (v) Lisp (c) Haskell (c) Swift (c) Fortran (v) F (i) JavaScript () Dart (v) Racket (i) Hack G) PHP (v) Erlang (i) Jruby () TypeScript (i) Ruby G) Perl (i) Python (i) Lua Time 1.00 1.04 1.56 1.85 1.89 2.14 2.83 3.02 3.09 3.14 3.40 3.55 4.20 4.20 6.30 6.52 6.67 11.27 26.99 27.64 36.71 43.44 46.20 59.34 65.79 71.90 82.91 (c) Pascal (e) Go (e) C (c) Fortran (c) C (c) Ada (c) Rust (v) Lisp (c) Haskell G PHP (c) Swift (i) Python (c) Ocaml (v) C (i) Hack (v) Racket (i) Ruby (c) Chapel (v) F (i) JavaScript (i) 'TypeScript (v) Java G Perl (i) Lua (v) Erlang (i) Dart (i) Jruby Mb 1.00 1.05 1.17 1.24 1.34 1.47 1.54 1.92 2.45 2.57 2.71, 2.803 2.82 2.85 3.34 3.52 3.97 4.00 4.25 4.59 4.69 6.01 6.62 6.72 7.20 8.64 19.84 gO 56 23 comments 6 reposts