Programmer Humor

32524 readers

517 users here now

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

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

cat_programmer@lemmy.ml

589

Stop (lemmy.zip)

submitted 3 months ago by anti_antidote@lemmy.zip to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

49 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

0.02% means you’re saving a fraction of a second for every hour of runtime. A lot of adding up is required to make it significant enough for anyone to notice.

Better to spend that time and effort on things that actually bring value. These kind of micro optimizations can also make the code unnecessarily complicated and difficult to work with, which is a hindrance for the optimizations that truly matter.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

In a single one-off program or something that's already fast enough to not take more than a few seconds—yeah, the time is spent better elsewhere.

I did mention for a compiler, specifically, though. They're CPU bottlenecked with a huge number of people or CI build agents waiting for it to run, which makes it a good candidate for squeezing extra performance out in places where it doesn't impact maintainability. 0.02% here, 0.15% there, etc etc, and even a 1% total improvement is still a couple extra seconds of not sitting around and waiting per Jenkins build.

Also keep in mind that adding features or making large changes to a compiler is likely bottlenecked by bureaucracy and committee, so there's not much else to do.