The hits keep on coming. I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry. https://nibblestew.blogspot.com/2021/07/looking-at-performance-of-refterm.html …
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori
I honestly thought it was a parody “code review” that is supposed to highlight the stupidity of “modern development practices”. But no, the author seems to be completely serious.
2 replies 0 retweets 28 likes -
Replying to @mahaleks @cmuratori
Where is the actual code review (I have read the follow-up blog post too)? There are opinions about how file contents are arranged, how Task Manager is displaying some metrics and how those might compare to some other metrics. My understanding of "code review" must be very wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CodeBasement @mahaleks
There was no code review, and there also were no comments about the part of the code that is non-example, which is clearly labeled in the source tree (everything is refterm_example_* or refterm_* depending on whether it is for testing or for use).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
So in this case "code review" means something like "I will complain that the author didn't use my preferred build environment, that they didn't use the CRT memcpy, and about the physical memory usage as reported by task manager without looking at what it represents."
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Separately, they managed to complain about memory usage despite the fact that a "code review" of the glyph cache would reveal that you can see exactly how much memory it takes for any given cache size _because it literally has a function that tells you that_.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @mahaleks
Absolutely yes. To all of it. The line about my understanding of code reviews being wrong was meant to be a little bit sarcastic, but I admit, that isn't obvious. Oh and isn't it confusing when people use established terms with different meanings? Thanks for decades of good work!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This isn't too in-depth for casual readers, but I'd say this is a code review that deserved to be called that in my humble opinion: https://fabiensanglard.net/duke3d/index.php … (Code reviews at the office are a somewhat different thing.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So, when that blogger was about to get to the interesting parts (the code, in-depth comparisons) and wrote that the short posts were already long enough or "real" comparisons couldn't be made, I rolled my eyes. It was all superficial at best. That 2nd blog post was somehow worse.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The best part about the second post was the SIMD part. That was pretty spectacular.
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.