Are not algorithms supposed to have the same time complexity across any programming language, then why do we consider such programming language differences in time complexity such as pass by value or pass by reference in the arguments when finding the total time complexity of the algorithm? Or am I wrong in saying we should not consider such programming language differences in implementation when finding the time complexity of an algorithm? I cannot think of any other instance as of now, but for example, if there was an algorithm in C++ that either passed its arguments by reference or by value, would there be difference in time complexity? If so, why? CLRS, the famous book about algorithms never discusses this point, so I am unsure if I should consider this point when finding time complexity.
Does time complexity differ of the implementation of algorithms in different programming languages?
378 Views Asked by edwardchase At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in ALGORITHM
- Hyperlink directs to hidden row
- HTML Button Link to Website from Text
- Replacing a hyperlink with an image on excel
- Retain css of links after enabling click-tracking of send-grid
- Problems with Clickable Divs in side bar
- Links with images and text - combined or separate?
- Remove Underline From HyperLinkButton XAML
- Launch a web browser or youtube using textview in android
- Can we edit hyperlink in Restrict editing mode in Word 2013?
- HTML link scroll down the page
Related Questions in LANGUAGE-AGNOSTIC
- Hyperlink directs to hidden row
- HTML Button Link to Website from Text
- Replacing a hyperlink with an image on excel
- Retain css of links after enabling click-tracking of send-grid
- Problems with Clickable Divs in side bar
- Links with images and text - combined or separate?
- Remove Underline From HyperLinkButton XAML
- Launch a web browser or youtube using textview in android
- Can we edit hyperlink in Restrict editing mode in Word 2013?
- HTML link scroll down the page
Related Questions in TIME-COMPLEXITY
- Hyperlink directs to hidden row
- HTML Button Link to Website from Text
- Replacing a hyperlink with an image on excel
- Retain css of links after enabling click-tracking of send-grid
- Problems with Clickable Divs in side bar
- Links with images and text - combined or separate?
- Remove Underline From HyperLinkButton XAML
- Launch a web browser or youtube using textview in android
- Can we edit hyperlink in Restrict editing mode in Word 2013?
- HTML link scroll down the page
Related Questions in BIG-O
- Hyperlink directs to hidden row
- HTML Button Link to Website from Text
- Replacing a hyperlink with an image on excel
- Retain css of links after enabling click-tracking of send-grid
- Problems with Clickable Divs in side bar
- Links with images and text - combined or separate?
- Remove Underline From HyperLinkButton XAML
- Launch a web browser or youtube using textview in android
- Can we edit hyperlink in Restrict editing mode in Word 2013?
- HTML link scroll down the page
Related Questions in CLRS
- Hyperlink directs to hidden row
- HTML Button Link to Website from Text
- Replacing a hyperlink with an image on excel
- Retain css of links after enabling click-tracking of send-grid
- Problems with Clickable Divs in side bar
- Links with images and text - combined or separate?
- Remove Underline From HyperLinkButton XAML
- Launch a web browser or youtube using textview in android
- Can we edit hyperlink in Restrict editing mode in Word 2013?
- HTML link scroll down the page
Trending Questions
- UIImageView Frame Doesn't Reflect Constraints
- Is it possible to use adb commands to click on a view by finding its ID?
- How to create a new web character symbol recognizable by html/javascript?
- Why isn't my CSS3 animation smooth in Google Chrome (but very smooth on other browsers)?
- Heap Gives Page Fault
- Connect ffmpeg to Visual Studio 2008
- Both Object- and ValueAnimator jumps when Duration is set above API LvL 24
- How to avoid default initialization of objects in std::vector?
- second argument of the command line arguments in a format other than char** argv or char* argv[]
- How to improve efficiency of algorithm which generates next lexicographic permutation?
- Navigating to the another actvity app getting crash in android
- How to read the particular message format in android and store in sqlite database?
- Resetting inventory status after order is cancelled
- Efficiently compute powers of X in SSE/AVX
- Insert into an external database using ajax and php : POST 500 (Internal Server Error)
Popular # Hahtags
Popular Questions
- How do I undo the most recent local commits in Git?
- How can I remove a specific item from an array in JavaScript?
- How do I delete a Git branch locally and remotely?
- Find all files containing a specific text (string) on Linux?
- How do I revert a Git repository to a previous commit?
- How do I create an HTML button that acts like a link?
- How do I check out a remote Git branch?
- How do I force "git pull" to overwrite local files?
- How do I list all files of a directory?
- How to check whether a string contains a substring in JavaScript?
- How do I redirect to another webpage?
- How can I iterate over rows in a Pandas DataFrame?
- How do I convert a String to an int in Java?
- Does Python have a string 'contains' substring method?
- How do I check if a string contains a specific word?
I think what you are refer to is not language but compiler differencies... This is how I see it (however take in mind I am no expert in the matter)
Yes complexity of some source code ported to different langauges should be the same (if language capabilities allows it). The problem is compiler implementation and conversion to binary (or asm if you want). Each language usually adds its engine to the program that is handling the stuff like variables, memory allocation, heap/stack ,... Its similar to OS. This stuff is hidden but it have its own complexities lets call them hidden therms of complexity
For example using reference instead of direct operand in function have big impact on speed. Because while we are coding we often consider only complexity of the code and forgetting about the heap/stack. This however does not change complexity, its just affect
n
of the hidden therms of complexity (but heavily).The same goes for compilers specially designed for recursion (functional programing) like LISP. In those the iteration is much slower or even not possible but recursion is way faster than on standard compilers... These I think change complexity but only of the hidden parts (related to language engine)
Some languages use internally bignums like Python. These affect complexity directly as arithmetics on CPU native datatypes is often considered
O(1)
however on Bignums its no longer true and can beO(1),O(log(n)),O(n),O(n.log),O(n^2)
and worse depending on the operation. However while comparing to different language on the same small range the bignums are also consideredO(1)
however usually much slower than CPU native datatype.Interpreted and virtual machine languages like Python,JAVA,LUA are adding much bigger overhead as they hidden therms usually not only contain langue engine but also the interpreter which must decode code, then interpret it or emulate or what ever which changes the hidden therms of complexity greatly. Not precompiled interpreters are even worse as you first need to parse text which is way much slower...
If I put all together its a matter of perspective if you consider hidden therms of complexity as constant time or complexity. In most cases the average speed difference between language/compilers/interpreters is constant (so you can consider it as constant time so no complexity change) but not always. To my knowledge the only exception is functional programming where the difference is almost never constant ...