Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

shakti.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 234 posts

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#91

Post by Y_Y »

082349872349872 wrote: post #53
defrost wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nice to see an exuberantly verbose arthur

The loquaciousness brings two Calvin Coolidge anecdotes to mind, the punchlines to which are: "you lose" and "with the same hen?"

> The President and Mrs. Coolidge were being shown around an experimental government farm. When she came to the chicken yard she noticed that a rooster was mating very frequently. She asked the attendant how often that happened and was told, “Dozens of times each day.” Mrs. Coolidge said, “Tell that to the President when he comes by.” Upon being told, Coolidge asked, “Same hen every time?” The reply was, “Oh no, Mr. President, a different hen every time.” Coolidge: “Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge!”

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/03/30/coolidge

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#92

Post by Y_Y »

082349872349872 wrote: post #53
defrost wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nice to see an exuberantly verbose arthur

The loquaciousness brings two Calvin Coolidge anecdotes to mind, the punchlines to which are: "you lose" and "with the same hen?"

> Once, at a dinner party, the woman sitting next to him said she bet she could get more than two words out of him. Coolidge then famously responded: "You lose.".

https://newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/the-mordant-humor-of...

Remind me of:

> Brevity is... wit

(Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington)

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#93

Post by magicalhippo »

anonzzzies wrote: post #73
magicalhippo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you can’t read the code you Shldnt be working on it I don't know this AW guy, but to me that's a huge red flag and a sign that a programmer hasn't worked on anything substantial. Ie non-trivial stuff that's maintained by a team over time. Being able to read the code is irrelevant, as the comments should tell you why the code is doing what it's doing. For example, yeah I trivially can see the code is doing a retr…

> a sign that a programmer hasn't worked on anything substantial Maybe you want to check who he is?

I meant I don't know as in I haven't actually worked with him.

Based on what I've seen before as well as the supplied code, I would be very skeptical to have him on my team.

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#95

Post by IshKebab »

wood_spirit wrote: post #85
stefano wrote: post #61

Those are some very big claims with respect to performance. Has anyone outside of the author been able to reproduce the claims, considering you need to pay 100k/month just to do it? I also wonder if the commercial version has anti-benchmark clauses like some database vendors. I've always seen claims that K is much faster than anything else out there, but I've never seen an actual independent benchmark with numbers. E…

Quick for building a website? Probably not. Quick for evaluating some idea you just had if you are a quant? Yes absolutely! So imagine you have a massive dataset, and an idea. For testing out your idea you want that data to be in an “online analytical processing” (OLAP) kind of database. These typically store the data by column not row and other tricks to speed up crunching through reads, trading off write performanc…

I would probably use Matlab for that sort of stuff tbh. Is K faster than Matlab?

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#96

Post by Chirono »

stefano wrote: post #61

Those are some very big claims with respect to performance. Has anyone outside of the author been able to reproduce the claims, considering you need to pay 100k/month just to do it? I also wonder if the commercial version has anti-benchmark clauses like some database vendors. I've always seen claims that K is much faster than anything else out there, but I've never seen an actual independent benchmark with numbers. E…

I used to use K professionally inside a hedge fund a few years back. Aside from the terrible user experience (if your code isn’t correct you will often just get ‘error’ or ‘not implemented’ with no further detail), if the performance really was as stellar as claimed, then there wouldn’t need to be a no benchmark clause in the license. It can be fast, if your data is in the right formats, but not crazy fast. And easy to beat if you can run your code on the GPU.

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#97

Post by IshKebab »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #54

Interesting things in here. #define _(e) ({e;}) //! I didn't know that corner of C. Removing the () from the macro does change what you can pass as e, and assigning the result of a block does work as one would expect. edit: -Wpedantic on gcc will tell me ISO C doesn't like the construct but it still compiles it happily. Clang offers -Wgnu-statement-expression-from-macro-expansion So it looks likely that this is the G…

You can use these to implement Rust-style `auto x = TRY(...);` in C++ which is pretty nice. Unfortunately MSVC doesn't support this extension.

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#98

Post by magicalhippo »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #78
magicalhippo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you can’t read the code you Shldnt be working on it I don't know this AW guy, but to me that's a huge red flag and a sign that a programmer hasn't worked on anything substantial. Ie non-trivial stuff that's maintained by a team over time. Being able to read the code is irrelevant, as the comments should tell you why the code is doing what it's doing. For example, yeah I trivially can see the code is doing a retr…

Defining substantial as written by a team over a long period of time seems to be putting the value in the wrong place. Is the important thing what the software does, or that it took a lot of people a long time to write it?

I didn't say long time to write it. I said maintained by a team over time.

Sure there might be some substantial software that was written as a one-off (ie not modified after release), but that's the minority by far.

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#99

Post by davidmurdoch »

fragmede wrote: post #57
sph wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but C isn't APL. I don't buy it that this how it was written from day 1. Occam's razor and all, this is obfuscated C, not code written by an alien superintelligence.

haven't you ever written code with single letter variable names and it makes sense to you? and then been forced to read somebody else's code with single character variable names and found it completely inscrutable? this is just that on (a lot of) steroids

I've written code with single letter variable names lots if times! But later on it most certainly does not make sense to me.

Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license

#100

Post by nordsieck »

dchest wrote: post #43

Everyone here charges too little for software. the free(MIT license) version is shakti.com/k/k.zip the supported version(supported and 10 to 100 times faster) is $100K per month(minimum) https://groups.google.com/g/shaktidb/c/5SPufca3mo4

I mean, it really depends on who your customers are. You can charge a lot if you can make the typical financial analyst 20% more productive.

Wouldn't work the same way if your core customer base is elementary school teachers.

Post reply on HN