this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
1267 points (98.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

32563 readers
584 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, absolutely. It's just the second most important thing.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You can add tons of explanatory comments with zero performance cost.

Also in programming in general (so, outside stuff like being a Quant) the fraction of the code made which has high performance as the top priority is miniscule (and I say this having actually designed high-performance software systems for a living) - as explained earlier by @ForegoneConclusion, you don't optimize upfront, you optimized when you figure out it's actually needed.

Thinking about it, if you're designing your own small matrix multiplication library (i.e. reinventing the wheel) you're probably failing at a software design level: as long as the licensing is compatible, it's usually better to get something that already exists, is performance oriented and has been in use for decades than making your own (almost certainly inferior and with fresh new bugs) thing.

PS: Not a personal critical - I too still have to remind myself at times to not just reinvent that which is already there. It's only natural for programmers to trust their own skills above whatever random people did some library and to want to program rather than spend time evaluating what's out there.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thinking about it, if you’re designing your own small matrix multiplication library (i.e. reinventing the wheel)

I thought of this example because a fundamental improvement was actually made with the help of AI recently. 4x4 in specific was improved noticeably IIRC, and if you know a bit about matrix multiplication, that ripples out to large matrix algorithms.

PS: Not a personal critical

I would not actually try this unless I had a reason to think I could do better, but I come from a maths background and do have a tendency to worry about efficiency unnecessarily.

I think in most cases (matrix multiplication being probably the biggest exception) there is a way to write an algorithm that's easy to read, especially with comments where needed, and still approaches the problem the best way. Whether it's worth the time trying to build that is another question.