I like to characterize it as "the slowest language of the fastest class of languages". In general other compiled languages are faster, though generally we're talking 2 or 3 times at the most (Go doesn't optimize very hard but the language defaulting to unboxed values made up for a substantial proportion of that versus more box-heavy compiled languages), but Go is "generally" faster than nearly all non-compiled languages. "Generally" here means "on general code"; JIT languages can definitely outdo Go on heavily numeric code, even in scripting languages, because JITs are very good at that, but the sort of "general" code that isn't obviously numeric will be faster in Go than any non-compiled language.
This sort of complicated analysis doubles as another example of the difficulty of context-free "fast" and "slow" labels. Is Go "fast"? For a general programming language, yes, though not the fastest. If you reserve "fast" for C/C++/Rust, then no it is not fast. Is it fast compared to Python, though? Yes, it'll knock your socks off if you're a Python programmer even with just a single thread, let alone what you can do if you can get some useful parallel processing going.
Java is very fast. You just have to account for the amount of absolutely terrible written Java code full of 6 levels of inheritance, 6 levels of nested loops and AbstractFactoryFactoryFactoryProviderImpls out there to slow it down. I swear I have seen so much Java code that in the name of "abstraction" and "maintainability" they would take x + y and turn it into 8 classes and method calls.
I think that school of Java is on the way out. Since it's absurdly backward compatible there's a lot of factoryfactory code still lingering, but I don't see it being written a lot.
Though there are a lot of unfortunate "truths" in Java programming that seems to encourage malignant abstraction growth, such as "abstractions are free", and "C2 will optimize that for you". It's technically kinda mostly true, but you write better code if you think polymorphism is terribly slow like the C++ guys tend to do.
@jerf beat me to it but indeed Golang is one of the very slowest compiled languages out there. I have an okay idea why but I wish someone there made a more serious effort to accelerate it at least by a factor of 2x.
I hate having to mull over the pros and cons of Rust for the 89th time when I know that if I make a service in Golang I'll be called in 3 months to optimise it. But multiple times now I have swallowed the higher complexity and initial slow building curve of Rust just so I don't have to go debug the mess that a few juniors left while trying to be clever in a Golang codebase.
I like to characterize it as "the slowest language of the fastest class of languages". In general other compiled languages are faster, though generally we're talking 2 or 3 times at the most (Go doesn't optimize very hard but the language defaulting to unboxed values made up for a substantial proportion of that versus more box-heavy compiled languages), but Go is "generally" faster than nearly all non-compiled languages. "Generally" here means "on general code"; JIT languages can definitely outdo Go on heavily numeric code, even in scripting languages, because JITs are very good at that, but the sort of "general" code that isn't obviously numeric will be faster in Go than any non-compiled language.
This sort of complicated analysis doubles as another example of the difficulty of context-free "fast" and "slow" labels. Is Go "fast"? For a general programming language, yes, though not the fastest. If you reserve "fast" for C/C++/Rust, then no it is not fast. Is it fast compared to Python, though? Yes, it'll knock your socks off if you're a Python programmer even with just a single thread, let alone what you can do if you can get some useful parallel processing going.
If we allow for warmup, Java is pretty fast for many workloads.
https://madnight.github.io/benchmarksgame/go.html
Java is very fast. You just have to account for the amount of absolutely terrible written Java code full of 6 levels of inheritance, 6 levels of nested loops and AbstractFactoryFactoryFactoryProviderImpls out there to slow it down. I swear I have seen so much Java code that in the name of "abstraction" and "maintainability" they would take x + y and turn it into 8 classes and method calls.
I think that school of Java is on the way out. Since it's absurdly backward compatible there's a lot of factoryfactory code still lingering, but I don't see it being written a lot.
Though there are a lot of unfortunate "truths" in Java programming that seems to encourage malignant abstraction growth, such as "abstractions are free", and "C2 will optimize that for you". It's technically kinda mostly true, but you write better code if you think polymorphism is terribly slow like the C++ guys tend to do.
Yeah, I have been disenfranchised by this style of programming. Its why I prefer languages like Python, when you use objects / classes as needed.
1 reply →
@jerf beat me to it but indeed Golang is one of the very slowest compiled languages out there. I have an okay idea why but I wish someone there made a more serious effort to accelerate it at least by a factor of 2x.
I hate having to mull over the pros and cons of Rust for the 89th time when I know that if I make a service in Golang I'll be called in 3 months to optimise it. But multiple times now I have swallowed the higher complexity and initial slow building curve of Rust just so I don't have to go debug the mess that a few juniors left while trying to be clever in a Golang codebase.