303

I was looking at code.golf the other day and I wondered which languages were the least verbose, so I did a little data gathering.

I looked at 48 different languages that had completed 79 different code challenges on code.golf. I then gathered the results for each language and challenge. If a "golfer" had more than 1 submission to a challenge, I grabbed the most recent one. I then dropped the top 5% and bottom 5% to hopefully mitigate most outliers. Then came up with an average for each language, for each challenge. I then averaged the results across each language and that is what you see here.

For another perspective, I ranked each challenge then got the average ranking across all challenges. Below is the results of that.

Disclaimer: This is in no way scientific. It's just for fun. If you know of a better way to sort these results please let me know.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dill@lemmy.one 55 points 10 months ago

Java placed way better than I expected

[-] bleistift2@feddit.de 32 points 10 months ago

You can write concise Java. Just like you can write readable Haskell. It’s just not idiomatic to do so.

[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 22 points 10 months ago

System.out.print("I agree.");

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kaba0@programming.dev 14 points 10 months ago

It is always dismissed as too verbose, while in go’s case it is never mentioned, when in fact the latter is way more verbose.. People’s bias show.

[-] coloredgrayscale@programming.dev 10 points 10 months ago

Maybe also bias by the number / experience of people using it.

1st semester students getting shocked by public static void main(String args) and meming it on the internet.

Go on the other hand likely isn't a common choice / option for a first language.

[-] dill@lemmy.one 8 points 10 months ago

I will gladly complain any day about go being terribly verbose.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] xigoi 13 points 10 months ago

Code Golf rules allow people to submit an anonymous function instead of a full program, which eliminates a lot of the boilerplate.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago

They weren't writing enterprise Java or they'd need a dozen factories and a few factory factories and probably a factory factory factory just to be safe.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] atheken@programming.dev 9 points 10 months ago

I don’t know the specifics of the golf problems, but I’m mostly in c#, also notorious for “having too much boilerplate,” and it looks like it’s 3rd by char count.

My guess is that languages with comprehensive standard libraries can do more with less custom code. As you should expect.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] muddi@hexbear.net 5 points 10 months ago

I wonder if it's all those variables named with single letter and abbreviations, so annoying to code review

[-] GarytheSnail@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago

String IDontKnowWhatsWorseEspeciallyWhenTheTypeIsAlsoIncludedString = "I don't know what's worse, especially when the type is also included";

[-] BlueBockser@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago

Honestly, I prefer an overly long name over some cryptic naming scheme that looks like minified JS. At least you can be sure of the variable's purpose and don't have to guess, which is far better for readability.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] xtremeownage@lemmyonline.com 31 points 10 months ago

I'd love to see the same comparison with more real-world use-cases.

Code golf, is mostly pretty simple use-cases, which have been optimized many times over.

When, you build out an application with a user-interface, proper event handling, etc.... c++ is MUCH more verbose then c# for example, and they are ranked pretty close together.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Charliebeans@slrpnk.net 24 points 10 months ago

Not expected C# to be this high. Also did not expected F# be so far away from C#.

[-] AdamBomb 5 points 10 months ago

Yeah that seems suspicious. F# is pretty succinct.

[-] Mot@beehaw.org 7 points 10 months ago

My guess is that this is really a measure of how much abuse the language will tolerate. C# probably lets you get away with a bunch of things (like checking for nulls) that F# requires.

[-] xuniL@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 10 months ago

In newer versions of C# you can use top level statements, which remove a lot of characters

[-] philm@programming.dev 22 points 10 months ago

On another look, though, we have to keep in mind, though that this is code-golf, so in no way representative for actual code-bases.

[-] expr@programming.dev 18 points 10 months ago

Haskell being so high really doesn't make any sense. Experience level maybe?

It's one of the tersest languages out there.

[-] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub 10 points 10 months ago

Bash being so high is what confuses me.

Damn near everything is an acronym

[-] peter@feddit.uk 9 points 10 months ago

I guess it takes more calls to different programs to do a task

[-] arthur@lemmy.zip 7 points 10 months ago

It's hard make such comparisons on "real world" code, and challenges use to be more attractive to people trying to learn, so your hypothesis make sense.

[-] spencerwi@lemm.ee 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm really surprised to see Java ranked as less-verbose than OCaml.

Here's an equivalent code sample in Java 17 vs OCaml:

Java:

abstract sealed class Expr permits Value, Add, Subtract, Multiply, Divide {
  abstract long eval();
}
record Value(long value) extends Expr {
  @Override
  long eval() { return value; }
}
record Add(Expr left, Expr right) {   
  @Override
  long eval() { return left.eval() + right.eval(); }
}
record Subtract(Expr left, Expr right) {
  @Override
  long eval() { return left.eval() - right.eval(); }
}
record Multiply(Expr left, Expr right) {
  @Override
  long eval() { return left.eval() * right.eval(); }
}
record Divide(Expr left, Expr right) {
  @Override
  long eval() { return left.eval() / right.eval(); }
}

OCaml:

type expr = 
  | Value of int
  | Add of expr * expr
  | Subtract of expr * expr
  | Multiply of expr * expr
  | Divide of expr * expr

let rec eval = function 
  | Value value -> value
  | Add (left, right) -> (eval left) + (eval right)
  | Subtract (left, right) -> (eval left) - (eval right)
  | Multiply (left, right) -> (eval left) * (eval right)
  | Divide (left, right) -> (eval left) / (eval right)

....Java has so much more syntactical overhead than OCaml, and that's even with recent Java and being pretty aggressive about using boiler-plate reducing sugars like Records. And F# has even less, since it doesn't require you to use different operators for numerics or do as much manual casting between strings/numerics

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] genoxidedev1@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago

Just gonna drop by to say that I love Crystal

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago

How is it's current state for building windows binaries? As a game dev who wants to fiddle with doing "everything from scratch" at least once, Crystal always seemed extremely enticing, the syntax more so than Nim

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] colonial@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

I'm surprised C is so low. I feel like I need to write 5x more code (compared to C++/Rust) to do the exact same thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] philm@programming.dev 10 points 10 months ago

Hmm interesting, I would've thought that Haskell would rank much higher

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Papercrane@feddit.de 9 points 10 months ago

What the heck is brainfuck?? Maybe a hot take but I wouldn't wanna program in that /s

[-] Akasazh@feddit.nl 18 points 10 months ago
[-] genoxidedev1@kbin.social 17 points 10 months ago

------[-->+++<]>.--------.-.----------.+.+++++++++++++.[-->+++++<]>+++.+[->+++<]>+.+..[--->+<]>+++.++[---->+<]>+.+[----->+<]>+.+++++++.-.++++++.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] parlaptie@feddit.de 9 points 10 months ago

Everyone's comparing the placements of their favorite language and I'm just left wondering how GolfScript gets beaten by seven other languages. I take it out was created specifically to do well on code golf? Mission failed, I guess.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago

This is why I love Ruby: Nearly as concise as Python but never complains about whitespace or indentation.

[-] UlrikHD@programming.dev 12 points 10 months ago

I've never understood the complaint about forced indentation. What kind of monster doesn't use indentation for their code anyway?

If anything, it's nice that the language forces it on you so that you don't stumble on code written by one of those monsters.

[-] swordsmanluke@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago

For me at least, it's less about forcing indentation as much as limiting what I can do with visual indentation.

Sometimes, it's nice to group lines at a given indentation level for visual comprehension vs the needs of the interpreter.

And to be fair, I don't hate Python's indentation style. It's usually not a major problem in practice. It's just that without the ability to override it, I lose a tool for expressing intent.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] kartonrealista@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Why would golfscript be more verbose than some others? Isn't it made for golfing?

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Rest in pieces golfcels it's pychad time

[-] shotgun_crab@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Would assembly be higher or lower than brainfuck?

[-] coloredgrayscale@programming.dev 12 points 10 months ago

Assembly would be lower. You have more complex / direct instructions in assembly. Brain fuck is pretty much just a pure turing machine, and has 8 instructions.

X86 has ~ 1000 + variants. Even ARM with a smaller instruction set has 232 instructions.

In brain fuck to set a number you'd have to count up (or down - underflow) to that number. In assembly you just set it.

Somewhere I've read that current assembly code with Makros should be similar to writing C.

[-] starman@programming.dev 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm suprised by F# position

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Is Dart inherently verbose, or does it just seem that way because people are using it to make Flutter widgets and they're verbose? When you look at the Dart syntax it doesn't seem like it needs to be verbose, but Flutter code certainly can be.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

This is from codegolf competitions, so non-Flutter I'd assume.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ydieb@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago

Interesting that zig is so much lower than c in expressiveness. Isn't that a bit weird?

[-] Severed_Fate@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

How come kotlin isn't there

[-] yggdar@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

With my professional experience in COBOL, I can honestly say I'm not surprised at all!

[-] mrsgreenpotato@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 10 months ago

Super interesting to see that. Didn't expect Python to have such a lead, but it is understandable.

[-] coloredgrayscale@programming.dev 23 points 10 months ago
import codegolf
codegolf.challenge1() 
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
303 points (95.0% liked)

Programming

16207 readers
79 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS