When I started following handmade hero some years ago, I suggested to my colleagues that we could learn from it and improve even in our field (e-commerce with C#. NET). Was met with almost hostile negativity because "the compiler takes care of that" and "premature optimization!"
-
-
Replying to @roberttoth_ @cmuratori
Well developer costs only get more expensive over time whereas compute costs are generally going down, so “good enough” perf and easily maintainable code is probably more cost effective in the long run, also no one likes their egos burned!
9 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
there, you are a the problem you cancel decade of HW improvements you are a waste, and you contribute to global warming yep
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @_______dev @youngwt and
Compiler engineers and language designers have improved their craft, many abstractions are zero cost. Performance isn’t the only concern in software development, especially when deploying to multiple platforms. You haven’t solved software engineering, don’t pretend like it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @antitheistdude @_______dev and
Re zero-cost abstractionshttps://youtu.be/B2BFbs0DJzw
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @meglio @_______dev and
I watched that, he had a cast inside a loop. This says nothing about zero cost abstractions. Raise your game people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @antitheistdude @meglio and
Zero cost abstractions are exactly that. If you have an abstraction that’s mistakenly called zero-cost, but it’s not actually zero cost, then you’re simply not calling a spade a spade. Also I think coding an entire game engine from scratch is admirable but beyond the norm.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @antitheistdude @meglio and
who cares, wtf is "zero cost abstraction"?,it is random words, nobody gives a shit about it respect people's HW and you do your best to program efficiently but dn't come with "dev cost a lot, so we hire $2 hour javascript developper to write desktop app with electron" bullshit
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @_______dev @meglio and
What? It literally means what it says: an abstraction that has no extra cost because it's compiled away. This has happened since the dawn of computation and will continue to be an area for innovation for language designers and VMs.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @antitheistdude @_______dev and
Wait, but what about that example where Casey demonstrates a so-called zero cost abstraction that turns out not to be zero-cost? What makes you think that other such zero-coat abstractions are not the same?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
The problem with zero-cost abstractions is just that almost all the things that are called zero-cost abstractions actually do cost something. If we had more "actually zero-cost abstractions", that might be something, but at the moment most things cost.
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori @meglio and
It would probably be more accurate to call everything currently called a "zero-cost abstraction" more accurately a "low-cost abstraction" or a "sometimes zero-cost abstraction", since often times the cost is low, and occasionally it is zero, but it is definitely not always zero.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @meglio and
zero-cost or not, my concern comes from engineers spending most of their time trying to solve programming by way of abstractions and patterns, rather than trying to solve the actual problem (that would give business value) by way of programming.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.