* Minimized functionality in the core language while relatively complex functionality such as [[Input/output|I/O]], string manipulation, and mathematical functions supported via standard library functions
* Resulting compiled code has relatively straightforward needs on the underlying platform; making it desirable for operating and [[embedded system|embedded]] systems
* Implementations tend to be much more efficient than other popular languages. For example, in the paper named "Ranking programming languages by energy efficiency", researchers found typically written Python benchmarks to use 75.88 times more electricity than the corresponding C benchmarks, while taking 71.9 times more time to complete than the C benchmarks. On average, the Python benchmarks had a peak RAM usage that was 2.39 times more than the C benchmarks.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nyuscholars.nyu.edu/en/publications/ranking-programming-languages-by-energy-efficiency|title=Ranking programming languages by energy efficiency}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~mignotte/IFT2425/Documents/RankingProgrammingLanguagesByEnergyEfficiency.pdf|title=Ranking programming languages by energy efficiency}}</ref> The paper has been published in Science of Computer Programming, and it has undergone peer review. <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167642321000022|title=Ranking programming languages by energy efficiency}}</ref>
