1. 14
  1.  

  2. 9

    This is really interesting but I think we should take the same attitude towards energy-use optimization as is generally recommended for performance-optimization. Tackle the large stuff first. Maybe first we should stop burning coal itself or stop wasting energy mining bitcoins perhaps even start drying your clothes on hangers… and then we can see how much energy your text editor is using.

    1. 6

      Does the language even matter when there’s so much low hanging fruit elsewhere?

      Lennart is killing the planet: http://fpaste.dy.fi/Ya0/disp

      1. 3

        That’s a fascinating perspective to bring up, in as much as you believe in an individual (or a corporations) environmental obligations to the planet.

        This suggests that aside from increases in cost due to penalizing fossil fuels and embracing renewable energy, there may also be a development cost to overhaul infrastructure to be more energy efficient to mitigate the rising cost of energy. At least, in a rational world.

        1. 3

          Let’s say we’re doing a very cool and popular text editor. Developers love it so much they keep it open 8 hours a day. Our user base is pretty big, maybe around 30000, not to mention those who use the editor from time to time. The editor is really optimized, in idle mode the background tasks consume roughly 1.5% CPU. The numbers are actually taken from a real world example.

          ED! ED is the answer!

          1. 2

            That’s my sad last hope for the future: no petroleum, no JavaScript!