Decoding memory disparity unraveling the mysteries of programming languages
Title: “Decoding Memory Disparity: Unraveling the Mysteries of Programming Languages”
Introduction: The Enigma of Memory Disparity
In the vast realm of programming languages, an intriguing question lingers: Why does a simple operation like save in assembler take only a few bytes (“MOV”), while General Purpose Languages (GPLs) such as Python and Rust result in applications that devour megabytes of memory? Is it merely a divergence in problem complexity, or is there more to this memory footprint conundrum?
Exploring the Complexity: Essential or Excessive?
One possible explanation for the memory disparity lies in the essential complexity of the problems we tackle. Are the applications we build with GPLs inherently more complex, demanding larger memory footprints? This raises a fundamental question about the nature of the problems we solve and the languages we choose to solve them.
Unveiling Potential Flaws: Is Something Amiss in Our Approach?
Another perspective prompts us to question the methods we employ in building software. Could there be inherent flaws in the way we write code or design applications? Are we inadvertently contributing to the memory bloat by adopting certain practices? This line of inquiry delves into the process itself, examining if there’s room for optimization or if we are inadvertently creating memory-intensive applications.
A Glimpse into Sector Lisp: Pure as the Driven Snow
The landscape of functional programming introduces an interesting contrast. Consider Sector Lisp, where functional programming reigns supreme. Here, mutation is non-existent. The absence of a heap and a remarkably small Garbage Collector (GC) footprint (a mere 40 bytes) sets Sector Lisp apart. Its GC purity rivals even that of the legendary John McCarthy.
With just two types—List and Atom—Sector Lisp manages to keep things simple, avoiding unnecessary complexities. The language is so compact that it fits within a mere 436 bytes, challenging our preconceived notions about the relationship between language expressiveness and memory requirements.
BLC: A Testament to Minimalism
From the learning curve of Sector Lisp emerged BLC, a language even smaller and more minimalist (383 bytes).
Conclusion: Seeking Harmony in Memory Usage
As we ponder the mystery of memory disparity in programming languages, it becomes clear that the answer is multi-faceted. Whether it’s the intrinsic complexity of problems, our approach to coding, or the elegance of pure functional programming, the quest for harmony between expressive power and memory efficiency continues. By exploring diverse languages and paradigms, we inch closer to unraveling the secrets behind the enigmatic memory footprint differences, paving the way for more efficient and streamlined software development.
Appendix - My Notes
This blog was ghost-written by ChatGPT-3.5 from the following notes:
point-form notes in Kinopio format
I manually converted the notes into markdown format, then fed the markdown to ChatGPT. I am currently working on a software tool that will do this conversion automatically.
Appendix
Appendix - See Also
References
https://guitarvydas.github.io/2021/12/15/References.html
Blogs
obsidian blogs (see blogs that begin with a date 202x-xx-xx-)
Videos
videos - programming simplicity playlist
Books
leanpub’ed (disclaimer: leanpub encourages publishing books before they are finalized - these books are WIPs)
Programming Simplicity Takeaways, and, Programming Simplicity Broad Brush
Discord
Programming Simplicity all welcome, I invite more discussion of these topics, esp. regarding Drawware and 0D
@paul_tarvydas
Mastodon
(tbd, advice needed re. most appropriate server(s))