|
β¬β¬β¬π©β¬
β¬π¨β¬β¬β¬
β¬β¬π©π©β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 944 6/6
β¬β¬π©π©β¬
β¬β¬π©π©π©
β¬π©π©π©π©
β¬π©π©π©π©
β¬π©π©π©π©
π©π©π©π©π©
What the heck, I simply didn't see it and my second and third guess are questionable, but my fourth and fifth guess are just plain nonsense.
It certainly had me spoiler[^] and spoiler[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 944 6/6
β¬β¬β¬π¨β¬
π¨π¨π¨β¬β¬
π©π¨π¨β¬β¬
π©π©π©π©β¬
π©π©π©π©β¬
π©π©π©π©π©
βThat which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.β
β Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 944 4/6
β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
β¬🟨β¬β¬β¬
🟩🟩🟩🟩β¬
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Ok, I have had my coffee, so you can all come out now!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 944 3/6
π¨β¬β¬β¬π¨
β¬β¬π¨π¨π¨
π©π©π©π©π©
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I just switched IEnumerable to IList and removed foreach (preferring for) and cut my execution time in my test from 65ms to about 45ms.
I've put a stripped down version of the code here. The first argument of each emphasized routine was IEnumerable<fa>, is now IList<fa> with no foreach.
This, ladies and gents, is why I don't like LINQ.
IList<FA> initial = FA.FillEpsilonClosure(this._fa);
IList<FA> next = new List<FA>();
IList<FA> states = new List<FA>(initial);
this.capture.Clear();
if (this.current == -2)
{
this.Advance();
}
long cursor_pos = this.position;
int line = this.line;
int column = this.column;
while(true) {
next.Clear();
FA.FillMove(states, this.current, next);
if (next.Count > 0)
{
this.Advance();
states.Clear();
FA.FillEpsilonClosure(next, states);
} else {
int acc = FA.GetFirstAcceptSymbol(states);
if(acc>-1) {
return FAMatch.Create(
acc,
this.capture.ToString(),
cursor_pos,
line,
column);
}
while (this.current != -1 &&
FA.FillMove(initial, this.current).Count == 0)
{
this.Advance();
}
if (capture.Length == 0)
{
return FAMatch.Create(-2, null, 0, 0, 0);
}
return FAMatch.Create(-1,
capture.ToString(),
cursor_pos,
line,
column);
}
}
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
modified 18-Jan-24 14:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Depending on the project, I might prefer to loose 20ms execution time (especially in background threads that run for 10 secs or more) and have better readability of the source code.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is why I dislike micro optimizations. If you want something that is fast, then use a language without a garbage-collector. Delphi goes quicker through a list of pointers than .NET with a for-loop gets its object-references.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not 20ms. it's a 30% improvement in overall execution time. If I increase the test size to run for 90 seconds, it would run for about 60 after the optimization. If you get even 20% off the execution in critical code paths it's generally worth the optimization. I mean, of course it depends on the circumstances, and is less true of business development, or development with large teams or teams with with a lot of turnover, where you can't afford the additional maintenance overhead, limited knowledge transferability and cognitive load of optimized code.
That is not a microoptimization. 30% off total execution time is a significant savings.
Adding, I used to use garbage collection in my ISAPI applications because it prevented nasty heap fragmentation due to all the string processing required of web servers. It made things faster. GC isn't always a losing performance proposition. When the situation calls for it, it can increase overall performance.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
30% in overall execution time? Does your code consist mostly of enumerations and while loops?
No, it doesn't go from 90 to 60, unless all your code is enumerate. Real world code is more than just retrieving a list. Sorry Honey.
VS shows you the place where it spends most time. "Limited knowledge trans...", aight, you're allowed to your views, I have mine.
And yes, mucking about a for loop vs enumerable in an VB6 runtime (which .NET IS) is not even a microoptimization, it is purely whining. Write in a goddamn real language if it is that important an link to it from .NET where you need it.
You have fallen, my angel, and very deep. Time critical stuff isn't worth .NET, and it isn't worth my time to read about 20 ms savings in a different loop that is less readable.
When the situation calls for it, you want someone who works with pointers, not with .NET. I would write a library for you to link to that does the heavy lifting, "if the situation calls for it". Because .NET is just an evolution of VB6, it is just a runtime interpreting with a memory manager. It is vbruntime600 with additional libraries. Any compiled language with pointers laughs out loud.
This is not even an argument honey.
EVERYONE can use a profiler and see how much your micro optimization may help them. If it does, then yay for them for writing ineffcient code.
My code does not consist of merely enumerations, it deals with a lot more stuff. Real world code consist of more than "looping".
And if speed is that paramount then why are you using .NET? Are you really blabbing about how to do a for loop in a VB-variant? That is what C# is, VB6 in a new interface, but that translates 1 on 1 to VB. You really whining about the performance of BASIC code (by any other syntax, but still a rose/VB)?
And you prove it by throwing some unreadable code, that saves me 20 ms? That is going to impress, really. You will shave of some ms, sacrificing readability for some code that takes more than 2 secs? Did you know that humans only see 48 frames per second? The END USER will not even notice, but the manager that pays someone to update your code WILL.
You're gonna go far kid.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
> 30% in overall execution time? Does your code consist mostly of enumerations and while loops?
In this case yes, in fact I posted the code, which is a regex matching algorithm.
> And yes, mucking about a for loop vs enumerable in an VB6 runtime (which .NET IS) is not even a microoptimization, it is purely whining. Write in a goddamn real language if it is that important an link to it from .NET where you need it.
I wasn't whining. I was making an observation. You're looking for a fight. I have better things to do with my time. Grow up.
Also VB.NET and VB6 runtimes have nothing to do with each other. You don't even know what you're talking about. Funny how arrogance and ignorance go hand in hand so often.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
A fringe case, as most of us do not write regex-libs, and anyone who would doesn't use an interpreter but a compiler. No, not a byte code compiler, that's just a fancy marketing sh*t for an interpreter that doesn't compile to native.
And yes, I'm looking for a fight; you are implying that some loop in an interpreter is interesting. It isn't.
VB.NET and VB6 are ridiculously the same. I've done that discussion a thousand times, where a manager imagined C# to be superior to VB.NET. It is a different syntax for the same VBRUN300.DLL, a fakkin interpreter that does bytecode like VB6 did with the same memory manager.
C# is marketing, but under the hood it is just VB7 with a different style of writing. Which is brilliant from an MS perspective btw, which proves MS is still the best.
Now, get off my lawn.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Linq makes it not a fringe case since it uses enumerations all over the place.
It's also a known documented issue with .NET. I'm far from the first person to make this observation. Folks from Microsoft have said as much.
And yes, you're looking for a fight. I'm an adult, which is why I was looking for a discussion. You're clearly not capable of something like that so we're done.
Feel free to keep running your mouth about .NET, in case anyone wasn't already convinced that you don't know half of what you're on about.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Linq makes it not a fringe case since it uses enumerations all over the place. You disliked Linq? Normal code doesn't require Linq? Did you make this microoptimization to prove you're better than Linq?
Quote: It's also a known documented issue with .NET. I'm far from the first person to make this observation. Folks from Microsoft have said as much. Is that the basis of your post? Maybe you missed the point; 20 ms is nothing in a background thread, and I would remove your code from any codebase for being unreadable and obfuscating. I gladly pay a few ms for readability, maintenance and fewer bugs. That is implying that there's only .NET devs and that there's no person available who can write in a language that compiles to native. You call those things "libraries".
Quote: And yes, you're looking for a fight. I'm an adult, which is why I was looking for a discussion. You're clearly not capable of something like that so we're done. So, that is your defense? You little twat copied MS and you can't handle me saying it ain't so?
Thank you for the limitless list of arguments and examples.
Wait, there's none?
"Folks from MS have said".. and you copied and try to impress. Sorry, but you didn't with your 20 ms. As if all code is a regex-lookup, which you present as if your micro optimization invalidates every foreach. If you want to regex, use a native language. I will BREAK your nonsense.
I do not care about you copying MS and presenting it as "your" observation. I just puke over the generalization
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
You seriously called me a "twat"?
What the hell is wrong with you? You are a child. You can't even code in C or C++, and you talk about Delphi like that's a flex. It's a joke. You're a joke, and you're a belligerent clown. I've reported your account because this isn't the first time you've been abusive and hostile to other people.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I've reported your account because this isn't the first time you've been abusive and hostile to other people. I cannot argue that, as it is true. I do not have much patience.
Quote: You are a child You meant "childish".
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have been happy to debate this with you.
That changed when it became clear to me that weren't interested in actually debating anyone.
You came here for a fight. You came here because you wanted to abuse other people.
You have some issues, and you are making them the problem of other people here.
That's not cool.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Not taking sides, but your posts are so much like the arguments I used to hear from my fellow Navy nucs. I kind of miss it, but we Navy nucs re an odd lot.
|
|
|
|
|
"and anyone who would doesn't use an interpreter but a compiler. No, not a byte code compiler, that's just a fancy marketing sh*t for an interpreter that doesn't compile to native."
Far as my limited experience goes C#, Java and JavaScript use an interpreter for their regexes.
And I know Perl does.
I suspect JavaScript like Perl cannot be anything but an interpreter (in most usages.)
At least for Java it might at some point go Native. Same could be true of C#.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any other day, this would go. Today is not that day.
It isn't 30% even if all you do is enumerate.
GC's is losing performance by definition of what the beast is made of. Show me one example of .NET that outperforms Delphi? Where, o where, would an interpreter with a lot of libraries outperform a compiled native language?
You .NET dev? Than you write in VB7, complete with a GC and a runtime interpreter. Your code will be faster than anything I write in a real compiler, innit? And your 20 ms on 60 is gonna make a 30% if it is only enumerating, because all that code does is enumerate.
I am not even amused a bit. Obfuscation to save a few ms. Yeah, that will help, really. You saved the world, but the rest of us are going to use enumerations because it is a damned good tradeof for those that only know .NET and cannot handle pointers. It makes code readable, which yours damned ain't. Great, you reduced some code by 20 ms. Most code takes longer.
Was there anything else you'd like to whine about, or are we done?
BPFH
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I love GC for jobs that allocate 14 Gigs of memory and then finish.
Poof!
14 gigs of memory returned to the OS very quickly. No need to clean the heap.
|
|
|
|
|
I mean, if you have it, why not, with a modern damned paged vmem system and gobs of RAM on a modern machine? Spare your program having to garbage collect as often.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Spare your program having to garbage collect as often. So you prefer to collect tons of garbage before doing anything about it? Then you may have some job to do when space runs out ...
Nothing wrong to be said about having 'enough' RAM, but if there is anything risk at all of having to garbage collect (and if you use heap allocation at all, there is ), I would much prefer to do it in small steps!
If you have got plenty of RAM, I'd much rather close my ears to all the whining about the internal fragmentation of buddy allocation (the only serious argument against buddy that I have encountered), to have a very fast allocation / deallocation mechanism, that also lends itself to incremental garbage collection.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on what I'm doing. In some scenarios, such as when you don't need to garbage collect but for at the end, such as CLI tools often do then yes, absolutely, because you've finished doing useful work and you don't need to make the user wait for the collection (even if the process is still running at that point you can have written out all of your output and everything.)
I write a lot of command line tools that do complicated things, like Deslang: From Code to CodeDOM and Back[^] that absolutely benefit from doing things this way.
I should add, that modern GCs collect in the background, and that should perhaps influence one's decision as it's probably less expensive overall to do one large collection than a bunch of little ones, particularly when asynchronicity is involved.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|