Computers are fast

#1

Post by billpg » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 5:35 PM UTC

Re: Computers are fast

#2

Post by wccrawford » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 6:09 PM UTC

Most of that time is probably actually spent outputting the numbers. Something like that would be really quick on the back end.

And with a bit of optimization, it would be even quicker.

Re: Computers are fast

#3

Post by njharman » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 6:35 PM UTC

I sometimes feel bad that I'm not more of an "algorythms developer", that I don't read all(any) research papers, that I don't remember what RedBlack Trees are, that other than minimal attention to using decent basic structures and reasonable bigO operaions (e.g hashes, don't pop of front of array in loop) when I sit down and code I invariably brute force it.

OTOH, I encounter the "computers are fast" phenomenon 9 out of ten times.

Re: Computers are fast

#4

Post by kia » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 6:35 PM UTC

Yes. Computers are fast. Who cares about algorithms... Premature optimization is evil...

But why then it is so annoying that Visual Studio starts longer than my whole custom linux system in VM on the same computer...

Re: Computers are fast

#5

Post by billybob » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 6:48 PM UTC

kia wrote: post #4

Yes. Computers are fast. Who cares about algorithms... Premature optimization is evil... But why then it is so annoying that Visual Studio starts longer than my whole custom linux system in VM on the same computer...

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but I'm on the same page. I try to focus on clarity and elegance in my code, and only worry about speed if it turns out to be slow.

But I sure as heck grumble when my computer is slow. "You've got, like, 800 hojillion cycles a second!" I say to it. "How hard is opening a program?!"

Is that hypocritical?

Re: Computers are fast

#6

Post by barrkel » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 6:48 PM UTC

kia wrote: post #4

Yes. Computers are fast. Who cares about algorithms... Premature optimization is evil... But why then it is so annoying that Visual Studio starts longer than my whole custom linux system in VM on the same computer...

I blame I/O. It's pretty fast warmed up.

Re: Computers are fast

#7

Post by mfukar » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 7:00 PM UTC

njharman wrote: post #3

I sometimes feel bad that I'm not more of an "algorythms developer", that I don't read all(any) research papers, that I don't remember what RedBlack Trees are, that other than minimal attention to using decent basic structures and reasonable bigO operaions (e.g hashes, don't pop of front of array in loop) when I sit down and code I invariably brute force it. OTOH, I encounter the "computers are fast" phenomenon 9 out…

I'm on the other side of your situation. These days, nine out of ten times I'm looking at papers, algorithms, lots of paper with big-O and cache nitpicking, brainstorming with others trying to make those 20 Gbps turn to 60..

Speed is a direct product of simplicity, and for me simple is elegant. I also think speed is important enough for me to feel strongly about cutting down a "feature" or two, to just make the damned thing not take all night to solve your sudoku..

Re: Computers are fast

#8

Post by kia » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 7:01 PM UTC

billybob wrote: post #5

kia wrote: post #4

Yes. Computers are fast. Who cares about algorithms... Premature optimization is evil... But why then it is so annoying that Visual Studio starts longer than my whole custom linux system in VM on the same computer...

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but I'm on the same page. I try to focus on clarity and elegance in my code, and only worry about speed if it turns out to be slow. But I sure as heck grumble when my computer is slow. "You've got, like, 800 hojillion cycles a second!" I say to it. "How hard is opening a program?!" Is that hypocritical?

On the first launch VS is slower.

Disclaimer: I am using custom gnu/linux built entirely form sources.

Re: Computers are fast

#9

Post by smithbits » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 7:03 PM UTC

A long time ago I was working on a data conversion project that involved taking what was essentially a 10 dimensional data set and reordering it. The easiest way to achieve this was to load everything into a ten dimensional array and read it out in another order, but I was sure this would take too long. So I spent some time trying to get a sparse array implementation working until I finally sat down and worked out that the entire 10 dimension data structure would require 63 megabytes of RAM (not giga, this was a long time ago.) The Sparc server in the next room had 64 megs of RAM. It was a simple algorithm with quick results and I moved on to the next problem. I think that was the last time I really really cared about performance. I'd spent the previous 15 years getting closer and closer to the hardware, caring about every register and every byte. I've spent the 15 years since then on the slow slide to letting the computer worry about everything. I currently live in Python land and love every minute of it. I hear that string concatenation is slow but honestly, it's never been an issue for me. Computers really are fast.

Re: Computers are fast

#10

Post by Symbol » Tue, Oct 12, 2010, 7:06 PM UTC

barrkel wrote: post #6

kia wrote: post #4

Yes. Computers are fast. Who cares about algorithms... Premature optimization is evil... But why then it is so annoying that Visual Studio starts longer than my whole custom linux system in VM on the same computer...

I blame I/O. It's pretty fast warmed up.

I/O is one of my biggest daily pains. Spend some time in Process Explorer on Windows and you can see just how much disk-based I/O the average app is doing. Anti-virus software makes the bad problem worse. It's just like pouring sugar in a gastank. Why isn't more software designed to take advantage, where appropriate, of large amounts of RAM?