Viewing profile — mohaps
mohaps
HN member- Joined
- Thu, May 26, 2011, 9:33 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 584
- Public activity
- 84 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About mohaps
Recent public activity
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #18920803
Interviewer: What are your strengths? Me: Cache Invalidation and Naming Things. We paused and looked at each other for a minute and then we burst out laughing.
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #17450460
the basic difference in approach was to switch the earlier approach of if (conditionA && conditionB && !conditionC) cache_it() to hey look, an item with featureset X is cacheable w…
-
comment
Comment #17450267
To add to Vlad's comment above: The major win was in being able to create a simple API which inherently computes update -> cache invalidation probability taking into account the se…
-
comment
Comment #17446725
One of the authors here. Be happy to answer questions
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #15110821
Thanks! Working on the timeline feature. The temporal data and diet/size tags need some clean up - a tedious work via an offline tool with RegEx and some nltk elbow grease :)
-
comment
Comment #15109153
I built PaleoCodex as an online interactive encyclopedia for Dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals for my six year old using wikipedia data. He is a big dinosaur buff and wants t…
- story
- story
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #12391092
now i remember why I went with the old linked list implementation. with the std::list, everytime I refreshed a node... i did a copy. basically to the tune of list.push_back(*iter) …
-
comment
Comment #12391069
ah, now I remember why I had carried on with the linked list from the old c++ codebase https://gist.github.com/Quinny/09e34afb1d187e43dea2f3c3b0c04... the key refresh in std::list …
-
comment
Comment #12390696
thanks. fixed
-
comment
Comment #12390564
yeah, saw the gist posted by quinnftw. that actually is a better way to do what I'm doing. Will update that along with the cache.remove(const Key& k, F deleteCallback) method. Than…
- comment
-
comment
Comment #12390288
the naked pointers are inside an internal kv namespace and are a convenience/carry over from the previous implementation (I've covered the justification for the way it's written in…
-
comment
Comment #12390262
the kv::List is not intended as a generic linked list implementation like std::list. The reason for the specific implementation is to get constant time removal and remove-add_to_en…
-
comment
Comment #12390059
yup! that's next up. :)
-
comment
Comment #12389868
mostly: yes! :) Also, keep in mind that most of the library is templates, which need to go in the header files. BTW, most of boost is header-only :) e.g. boost/noncopyable.hpp woul…