It's not rocket science, but "trivial" is very harsh. This stuff is fiddly to get right. The author (who I assume is a student) seems to have done a good job and it's a nice writeup.
I guess you could argue that, but it's strange that people want to give a student's first project (with a lot of huge mistakes like thinking node is going to outperform C because they didn't turn optimizations on) so much interest. I think people are taken in by big numbers and assume there is something cutting edge because they don't know any better.
The results are just some particles in an extremely basic pattern, there isn't a lot of payoff.
One point needs correcting though - nowhere in the article I say that node is outperforming C, on the contrary - I stressed that I didn't use any flags so that people don't come to a conclusion that C would be always slower, and I explicitly mentioned not get fixated on such benchmarks.
What it was meant to show is that V8 is *good enough* to even consider it for the job :)
You benchmarked three different programs and one was compiled to be slow. Why give times for a debug build when the other two aren't? Showing off performance metrics that are both apples to oranges while also giving times for something not made to run fast is total nonsense.
Do you really not think this is a mistake? Most people would see C getting outperformed and realize there is something wrong. I'm shocked anyone would both this then try to rationalize it after.
If you read carefully you might see that I'm criticizing rationalizing a bizarre mistake as something that is completely fine.
Also if someone wants to put their first CS project on the internet, then label it that way and not as some sort of blog post about them doing something unique.
