It's always nice when a small change is a big win.
This reminds me of the gc_disable() PR that reduced composer install times by half a few months back.
Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
91–100 of 158 posts
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#92I still can't see the real usefulness of linked lists, the idea of having a data container that doesn't have a transparent indexing algorithm sounds ill-advised. Linked lists should be named "linked graphs" instead. There is so much relevant science to learn about CPU caches, than there is about using a container which is based on nested pointer indirections.
Note that the links in a linked can be in-line with the contained data (aka. intrusive pointers). Albeit quite uncommon, they don't need to be pointers/references at all, but indexes.
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#93I'm really surprised by the amount of smugness in the comments here. A bit of good-natured teasing, followed by a wheelbarrow full of "ruby-devs" this and "web-devs" that. Take off your Hats of Superior Coding. Any one of us, regardless of honorific titles, could have made this mistake, and you know it. Being steeped in CS Fundamentals does not immunize you against bugs. Congratulations to tenderlove for finding the…
Thanks, I really appreciate the kind words! <3<3<3<3
[deleted]
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#94Good job, tenderlove, that's a nice performance boost.
Personally, I really dislike Ruby's syntax, though I haven't spent a huge amount of time with it (because I dislike the syntax). The use of bracers and other lexical markers makes code a lot clearer and faster to decipher, imo, than a bunch of def and ends. (I know that () are optional in Ruby, can you also use {} if you desire? Again, not 100% familiar with the language features. Just know some standard rails implementations of the language).
Maybe it just hasn't 'clicked' with me yet, but bleh. The dynamic typing doesn't help its case in my book either. That's my personal preference, and why I try to avoid using ruby, even for the web backed by rails despite it's popularity. Then again, if you need to get a web project up and running quickly rails is never a bad choice (in my experience).
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#95Good job, tenderlove, that's a nice performance boost. Personally, I really dislike Ruby's syntax, though I haven't spent a huge amount of time with it (because I dislike the syntax). The use of bracers and other lexical markers makes code a lot clearer and faster to decipher, imo, than a bunch of def and ends. (I know that () are optional in Ruby, can you also use {} if you desire? Again, not 100% familiar with the…
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#96"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%"
--Donald Knuth
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#97Semi-related: does anyone know why installing gems is so ridiculously slow? What is the thing doing? Downloading tarballs, yes, but then? It's a dynamic language; there is no compilation or verification! Why can I install Ruby packages using apt almost immediately, when gem/bundle install takes half a coffee break? I'm growing more impatient with the years. I have measured out my life with slow software. We talk abou…
This may sound a bit glib, but the reason it's so slow is because basically every Rubyist goes "Does anyone know why installing gems is so slow? What is this thing doing?" And then _takes a coffee break instead of figuring it out_.
There are very, very, very few people who actually do any work on core infrastructure projects. I don't blame them. The codebase of rubygems is... not exactly welcoming. I myself did some work a while back, got frustrated, and quit. But if you want the real reason, there it is.
Oh, and when you _do_ overcome all these barriers and then actually make an improvement, people will say "lol rubyists learning data structures" instead of saying "thank you for saving a bit of the most precious resource I have every single day, time."
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really. Every time I whine publicly how web programming people aren't familiar with even basic CS, I get a slap. But really, I should move to web programming. I'll be an expert computer scientist there, probably.
Annnndddd.... what reaction do you expect? "Oh, please come and do web development so we can bask in the glow of your self-righteousness and infinite knowledge of computers." /snark (apologies for being offensive, but good lord, what a silly statement - unless I missed the joke) I stand before you as a counterpoint to your foolish generalisation, and guess what, I know plenty of other people that don't fit your stere…
> You wouldn't be an expert computer scientist. You'd be a junior developer, probably.
+1
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Annnndddd.... what reaction do you expect? "Oh, please come and do web development so we can bask in the glow of your self-righteousness and infinite knowledge of computers." /snark (apologies for being offensive, but good lord, what a silly statement - unless I missed the joke) I stand before you as a counterpoint to your foolish generalisation, and guess what, I know plenty of other people that don't fit your stere…
I keep repeating myself on Hacker News, but once more, we've found the difference between Software Engineer and Computer Scientist. One makes things work, the other is a mathematician. Why do we keep conflating the two?
My position on "computer science is math": http://www.scott-a-s.com/cs-is-not-math/ HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3928276
Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list
#100Ruby people discovering algorithms ducks
Except the linked list implementation was added to the project in 2013[1], and is presumably used elsewhere in the program. This only fixes a couple of bugs using that same mechanism.
https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/800f2e63bc6174b5b4...