11–20 of 22 posts
1. [Ternary computers]: Base-3 is the most efficient of all integer bases; numbers are stored most economically with trits. 2. Something like a [Lisp machine] that is optimized for functional-style programming with immutable data. [Ternary computers]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ternary_computer [Lisp machine]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Lisp_machine
1. [Ternary computers]: Base-3 is the most efficient of all integer bases; numbers are stored most economically with trits. 2. Something like a [Lisp machine] that is optimized for functional-style programming with immutable data. [Ternary computers]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ternary_computer [Lisp machine]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Lisp_machine
Heap trees would be less efficient with trits. What do you mean "most efficient of all integer bases"?
Heap trees were probably optimized for binary, since that's what we use. Perhaps there would be a ternary version of heap trees? Or a totally different ternary data structure that serves the same purpose?
[1]: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/446664/what-is-the-...
1. [Ternary computers]: Base-3 is the most efficient of all integer bases; numbers are stored most economically with trits. 2. Something like a [Lisp machine] that is optimized for functional-style programming with immutable data. [Ternary computers]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ternary_computer [Lisp machine]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Lisp_machine
Heap trees would be less efficient with trits. What do you mean "most efficient of all integer bases"?
(Parent comment happened to start as one of these "* * *" comments.)
How do you optimize architectures for event-based "do nothing 99.9% of the time, do A LOT 0.1% of the time" workloads? I don't know. My hunch is that you should prioritize memory latency and pay more attention to worst case rather than best case performance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heap trees would be less efficient with trits. What do you mean "most efficient of all integer bases"?
Slightly off topic, but I'm curious why some users start a comment with "* * *", then edit it later? Is this just a HN thing? (Parent comment happened to start as one of these "* * *" comments.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slightly off topic, but I'm curious why some users start a comment with "* * *", then edit it later? Is this just a HN thing? (Parent comment happened to start as one of these "* * *" comments.)
Do you mean my comment? I did not write nor remove "* * *".
I've seen these ephemeral "* * *" comments before, and even another comment asking about them.
I think next gen cpus should be tuned for actual workloads rather than the synthetic benchmarks they are often designed to beat. Essentially latency and not throughput. Right now I'm entering text into a text field on a web page and I don't care about sustained throughput but it would annoy me greatly if, say, switching tabs would cause noticeable lag and/or make the noisy cpu fans spin up. How do you optimize archit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean my comment? I did not write nor remove "* * *".
Oh, interesting! According to HN Replies, that was the content of your comment ( https://imgur.com/t5316Rx ) (When I checked on HN, it was not "* * *") I've seen these ephemeral "* * *" comments before, and even another comment asking about them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, interesting! According to HN Replies, that was the content of your comment ( https://imgur.com/t5316Rx ) (When I checked on HN, it was not "* * *") I've seen these ephemeral "* * *" comments before, and even another comment asking about them.
That is interesting, perhaps a synchronisation error? As if the actual comment wasn't available yet but the email already got sent.
And I've seen it in 100% of your replies to me, when I've never seen it for other replies. So I wonder if it's related to how you use HN
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is interesting, perhaps a synchronisation error? As if the actual comment wasn't available yet but the email already got sent.
I don't think it's just an HN Replies email thing. I've seen "* * *" in actual HN comment threads, too. And I've seen it in 100% of your replies to me, when I've never seen it for other replies. So I wonder if it's related to how you use HN