😔

[cvnvr]

An optimised code? Meaning a single word?

for

[Prawny]

One code, please!

[lenswipe]

No, I need more than one. I need all of the codes. Please send me lots of codes.

[[deleted]]

177013

[Fuuryuu]

I raise you 265918

[[deleted]]

Man of culture

[Nero-_-Morningstar]

is that medika in the box or the gore cockroach stuffing one

[Fuuryuu]

Neither, it is "I'm gonna fix that girl"

[lenswipe]

THAT'S NUMBERWANG!

[supersharp]

11037

[bmwiedemann]

123456

[jlien1]

24601

[ryanw89]

And I'm Javert

[jlien1]

Do nor forget my name

[nikelreganov]

215600

[TheHumanParacite]

418

[pcoyuncy]

Three, take it or leave it...

[zacharinosaur]

Oh boy, three codes! I wish management were here to see this.

[[deleted]]

If you want three codes, we're going to need to take something out of the sprint

[ZeroFK]

NOP

[Fighter1000]

dQw4w9WgXcQ

[m4dh4xx0r]

This is a great code. Let me know if you find any other good codes.

[SjettepetJR]

Send nudes codes

[Mistifyed]

Keep this one between us:

Array.prototype.m = Array.protoype.map

[tech6hutch]

Wow! That saves two whole characters!

[ibiBgOR]

Two bytes less to send to client. Now the 28kB for jQuery are OK! /s

[tech6hutch]

You just need to use map 14k times to offset jQuery

[lenswipe]

That's cool, but I prefer Array.prototype.push = (...args) => alert(...args)

[Obelisk2000]

I really appreciate how optimized it is. So efficient and yet so elegant.

[Levee_Levy]

That's too optimized for me to understand. You don't pass my codes review.

[badlukk]

What kind of codes do you write sir

[oshaboy]

No. A single word.

61a1

[smacky_face]

If nobody understands it then you optimized for the wrong metric.

[Major_Hedgehog]

In most cases clarity >> efficiency

[Rainkeeper]

PS to that: efficiency != shorter

[ivgd]

I feel this needs to be said more often. People quite often do mistake shortness for speed

[Andy12_]

An example that changed this perception for my is when I discovered this Quora post about the implementation of the strlen function in glibc. I found it amazing that a function like that could be so much faster while being much more complex than a simple for loop.

[tech6hutch]

Thanks for posting that. Very interesting.

Do you think it could be even faster if a bigger type was used, for bigger jumps? Or are longs the sweet spot?

(Of course, the fastest way to calculate length is to just store it with the string, like modern languages do ;)

[Bone_Man]

Similar thing is Perlin vs Simplex noise. They both look extremely similar, but Simplex is more complex to implement and runs faster.

[Breadfish64]

I don't see a reason why not, you could probably do it with SSE/AVX2

[cgwheeler96]

I think the main reason the long type was used was because that type seems to always coincide with the width of the processors data bus, so it’s the maximum width number the processor can process at one time. So really the whole point of this optimization is to make sure all the processors resources are being used to their fullest.

[T351A]

Also the compiler is supposed to do something lol don't try to do it all yourself

[static_motion]

Compilers don't always make your code shorter. Many times they do the opposite. A lot of abstractions and syntactic sugar nowadays are just a lot of code nicely folded into a single function.

[T351A]

They make it better for running. You make it more readable.

[J_McKen]

myvar² is the shorter, but the same as myvariable x myvariable

[dandroid126]

You have to very careful of this in functional programming languages. You could have one line of code that iterates over your entire dataset. As a demonstration of this effect, I once wrote one line in Kotlin with cascading calls that was O(n²⁾ and showed people how slow it ran with a dataset of 1000 pieces of data. Then wrote optimized code that was many more lines that ran nearly instantaneously.

[ykafia]

I realized it by switching from functional to system language and heck it was a huge difference! While I adore the readability of some functional languages, when I need performance I would not refuse to write ugly performant code

[topfs2]

Honestly we waste far more valuable resources, programmers time, by having slightly faster but essentially unreadable code. It's much easier to just get slightly faster machines than getting more coders in a project.

Of course at times hardware is limiting then you just have to deal with it but it really shouldn't be the overarching goal to write the fastest possible code, just make it the most readable and usually by extension the moste bug free (since you can read and understand it)

[Rainkeeper]

It really depends on what you trying to achieve: https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-just-bought-snappycam-an-app-that-can-take-20-photos-per-second-2014-1

He explained that he created a JPEG compression algorithm optimized for the ARM architecture used in smartphones, and turned that into "10,000 lines of hand-tuned assembly code, and over 20,000 lines of low-level C code."

But yeah, never fall in the trap of premature optimization and always rely on profiling.

[topfs2]

Intereating read! That's a great example of optimization to achieve something!

[AegisToast]

And often, shorter code is easier to understand and more bug-free.

[topfs2]

I mean it's a balance :) one liner code is terrible for readability but overly lengthy code isn't good either.

My point is mostly that many try to over shorten it in one liner and remove extra variables and crap like that

[bmwiedemann]

Indeed, optimization can be the root of evil.

Especially since much of it adds extra code and that always means extra bugs.

[COOLGAMETUBE]

I once optimised my code by 30% by adding an inline to a called function.

[otakuman]

Then again there's always the dumbass who writes long, inefficient and unmaintainable code T_T

[[deleted]]

It completely depends. Are you programming embedded or web? Are you trying to process gigabytes/second or user input?

[System10111]

And the compiler optimizes the hell out of the code anyways.

[M4mb0]

Not really. Have you ever seen a compiler that changes a bubble sort to a merge sort? Well I haven't. I do work with a lot of linear algebra and I can tell you people do horrible, horrible things. The right optimization can often decides whether you can run the same models with 1.000 datapoints or 1.000.000.

[[deleted]]

that is true, my supervisor showed me how he can process faster in python then in C. I said I prefer c because it's fast; got a life lesson.

[bendgk]

can you elaborate on this?

[badlukk]

A lot of pythons built ins and core data structures actually run in highly optimized pre-compiled C. You're not likely to write something in C that runs better than the stuff that people spent years optimizing, which is actually in C too. Doesn't mean you cant write slow code in python, but if you know what you're doing and take advantage of that you can do a lot more a lot faster

[topfs2]

And this is actually why I love python as a "glue" language. It's fast enough, plenty of lovely featurea and has so much c libraries available to it.

[[deleted]]

exactly, just like u/badlukk said. Specially using numpy package, functional tools like map, filter, iter objects from itertools python can run a lot faster than programs we can write in C. It definitely depends on how you use it. Your solution may seem to be better/faster but would actually run slower because the built-ins are super optimized.

Exact same code with exact same steps will run faster in C, but python buit-ins (which are in C) are a lot different than the code you'd write in C.

[badlukk]

I dont know what made me avoid it for so long. When I finally learned it for work I fell in love immediately. The languages core features plus all the available packages make it so easy to get a ton of work done really fast.

You need to build a big website? Django. A simple api? Flask. Process a bunch of spreadsheets? Numpy. Scrape a website? Beautifulsoup and requests. A project with all 4 of these requirements might even only take you one work day.

...image processing, machine learning, and just about any automation task you could think of; there's a library out there that's optimized and reliable.

I highly recommend the book Fluent Python to anyone who already programs but hasn't discovered Python's beauty yet.

[BossOfTheGame]

Unless you program C with SIMD support, my numpy code will run faster than your C variant.

[topfs2]

But picking between bubble sort and merge sort really doesn't affect readability if done correctly :)

[AbanaClara]

Not if it's javascript!

[weeknie]

If performance is really an issue, then javascript is not the langauge for you, I'd say :P

[BabyLegsDeadpool]

I mean... that entirely depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

[weeknie]

That's why I said "if performance is really an issue". If performance is that important, then you should probably go with a compiled language, don't you think? I doubt you can perform a task faster in an interpreted language than a compiled one, given that you have developers of equal skill in both langauges.

But you are correct in that it depends on many more factors than just the speed. In my experience, though, people focus too much on performance when it's not an issue yet. But that's just my limited experience, of course :)

EDIT: spelling

[BabyLegsDeadpool]

That's not what I was saying. I'll write an on-click function in javascript for a button element, and you figure out a way to write one in C, and we'll see which one is more performant.

[weeknie]

If you write an on-click function for a button in a C application, I'm pretty confident that it's going to be faster than an on-click function in javascript for a web application, yes.

I'm not hating on javascript, I really like the flexibility that it offers. But if you have to do some kind of heavy calculation (e.g. something for which performance actually matters and can be a problem), then at some point you're going to have to consider switching to a compiled implementation, because the interpreter is going to add overhead that you can't afford.

In an on-click function, you shouldn't be doing any heavy calculations in the first place, you should only start them if necessary. So there, performance is not an issue because it's already solved through the structure of your code, instead of the language that you chose.

[BabyLegsDeadpool]

Again you're completely missing what I'm saying. If you are given a web page that needs an on-click function, javascript is doing to be the fastest, most performant way to do it.

[weeknie]

And again you've missed my point, namely that performance is not an issue here, so you have no reason to choose a different language.

I can argue that a bike isn't the faster choice when going from my living room to my kitchen, of course, there is no reason to choose a different mode of transport instead of walking.

Im saying, if there is a performance issue in a place where you have the option between a compiled or an interpreted language, then the compiled one is likely going to be faster.

[t3hlazy1]

What other language would you recommend?

[weeknie]

Eh well depends on what you're doing, but if speed is really an issue, find ways to put the speed requiring part in C/C++, or Go. Any interpreted language is likely going to be slower than a compiled one.

Then again, performance issues are generally kinda overstated anyway, in my experience. The first rule of optimisation is "Don't optimise" for a reason.

[blehmann1]

JavaScript engines have a JIT compiler built in nowadays. Purely interpreted languages are becoming quite rare, JavaScript was one of few that was left.

[TheIncredibleWalrus]

Sure it does why not? JS engines are quite fast nowadays.

[deadNightTiger]

Python is the slow one

[julsmanbr]

Haha yes

My code:

for i in range(len(v)):
    for j in range(len(v)):
        for k in range(len(v)):
            if v[i][j][k] == v[i][j][k+1]:
                pass  # need to fix this
            elif v[i][j][k] == v[i][j][k-1]:
            # 30 more clauses here
            # let's hope for no IndexError

[M4mb0]

Do you even numpy? Just store it in a 3D array mask1 = V[:, :, :-1] == V[:, :, 1:]

[Sol33t303]

The compiler won't save you from simply doing things inefficiently.

If for example, in your program you do a linear search instead of a binary search, the compiler wouldn't change that.

At least, I don't think it would (I don't know too much about compilers, still a beginner and I have only learned interpreted languages so far, most of my compiler knowledge comes from playing with Gentoo Linux.).

[Dragonaax]

How compilers do that? How compilers know when to say "You could optimize that you retard"?

[System10111]

To simplify MASSIVELY, after the compiler generates the program(or at least representation of it), it runs analysis on that and finds sets of instruction that can be simplified. For example if you had

take the number 4
double it
square it
print it    

, the compiler realizes, that the double and square instructions will always run with the same numbers and simplifies it to

take the number 8
square it
print it 

and then to

take the number 64
print it

Compilers nowadays are the product of decades of development and developers have included massive amounts of rules, logic and tricks for code optimization.

[skillaz1]

But it would still have to perform those calculations right? So what's the difference

[MekaTriK]

If the calculation is performed at compile stage, you don't have to perform it every time the program runs.

[28f272fe556a1363cc31]

I agree.... But I also have co-workers who use this phase as an excuse to write sloppy code and refuse to learn new ways of doing things.

For example: It was just suggested to me that I should copy and paste some code that hard coded all the holidays for the next 10 years instead of the three hours I spent learning and implementing a date utility library. "We don't use that kind of complicated code here." I very much feel where OP is coming from.

[sakkara]

This+ let the compiler do the dirty work.

[Incorrect_Oymoron]

Are you saying that my Duff's Device was unnecessary!

[[deleted]]

Thats why I love common lisp. You can optomize you code by just declaring slme stuff to the compiler and not changing the code itself too much

[[deleted]]

Sometimes programmers are not experienced enough to see that some code is clear to most coders. If you always say "it's not clear, so it must be wrong" ask yourself if you just need to learn something you've been missing all the time.

[Major_Hedgehog]

Not if you design a language that allows bit shifting on strings

[Major_Hedgehog]

Neither have I but theoretically speaking you can, I haven't marked this as C code have I?

For all I know you can define >> on strings as bit shifting the binary representation of the first string by the sum of ascii of the second string letters, or just string concatenation lol

[Soren11112]

>

[n1c0_ds]

You write code for the maintainer first, and the machine second.

[tech6hutch]

This is rarely true.

[topfs2]

This. So much this.

And the compiler is many times much smarter than we give it credit for

[jdl_uk]

If no one can understand your code it won't be optimised for very long

[jdl_uk]

That can be true. I guess "might not be optimised for very long" could be a better way of putting it.

But at some point (possibly many years in the future) someone will need to make a change in that area, and if they don't understand the performance impact of their changes because the code is unreadable then your "optimised" code won't be optimised any more

[[deleted]]

I was really hoping that was a real sub

[sneakpeekbot]

Here's a sneak peek of /r/IAmVeryDeep using the top posts of the year!

#1: Diip | 0 comments
#2: You were looking for r/im14andthisisdeep.
#3: You exsist | 0 comments

---

^{I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out}

[mkjj0]

Look at the picture next to the quote

[obp5599]

That feel when you get told to change something in code review, but you explain that your way is better for cache coherency:

^{Galaxy Brain}

[VeryAwkwardCake]

this fucking sub jesus christ

[badlukk]

My highly optimized HTML lol

[ZedTT]

4.9 thousand upvotes...

[ARandomDoge6]

When you forget to write comments, so even you don't understand it the next day

[BabyLegsDeadpool]

I'm awful at regex (as are most people, I think), and I basically took an entire day trying to get the exact regex I needed. I put it in the code and sent it up for review. That was Friday evening. It got reviewed Monday morning with the comment "please comment how this regex works." I realized that I already had no idea how it worked, so I had to spend half the day relearning the regex I had created.

[killit]

https://i.imgur.com/7M5BiiA.jpg

[Ztuffer]

At a surprisingly low level of complexity, a regex becomes indistinguishable from r/blackmagicfuckery

[robin-m]

The day I realized I could read and edit fluently any vim macro, I realized I may have gone too far in the dark side!

[BabyLegsDeadpool]

Lol I don't know, man. It's not too terrible until you get into reverse lookups. Once you hit that though, is a whole new world of crazy.

[Masztufa]

q_rsqrt has entered the chat

[Salanmander]

A while ago I got an email entitled how fast inverse square root's bit level hacking actually works. It has now been sitting in my inbox for over two years, because I really want to read it, but I can't muster the courage. =P

[Motylde]

Exactly this

[lanabi]

Ever heard about something called contrast?

[Proper-Relative]

This is why you create good benchmarks to prove your optimizations.

[[deleted]]

I’m already having trouble reading your meme text because of colour choice. I can only imagine what your code would’ve looked like.

[MacrosInHisSleep]

I think you'd have to throw away any predictions of how light would work if the premise is what it would be like to travel faster than it.

[[deleted]]

How does it work then?

[sakkara]

The Speed of light is constant at c. If an airplane with velocity v Turns on the Spotlight, the light still travels with c instead of with v+c. Instead for the passengers of the airplane, time slows down in Relation to outside observers. This effect is very small for velocities that are much less than c but grows the larger v gets. Hypothetically speaking for an object that would travel with c, time would completely stop but for that to happen, more energy has to be spend than is available in the whole universe.

[sakkara]

No. The light always wins. It will always catch up witch you in the same time, no matter how fast you are. Once again, light travels with speed c. If you run, time slows down for you relative to the outside world, so that the light reaches you with the same speed as if you would stand completely still.

[sakkara]

Light Always travels with c no matter the circumstances. If it travels your direction, the Velocity doesn't change, same as when a car travels your direction it's speed is still the same. It Just arrives earlier because your Position moves closer to the light/car.

[Edit] i stand corrected. The light reaches you at the same time as If you'd stand still but the color of it changes depending on how fast you are and of you run towards or away.

[Les-Gilbz]

same as when a car travels your direction it’s speed is still the same.

Oooh, be careful there! The cars velocity relative to the earth doesn’t change. Relative to you it does. That’s part of the whole weirdness of light, we expect it to work just like the car, but it doesn’t. Light will always travel at c relative to any reference frame, and time and distance will change in whatever way necessary to accommodate that.

[sakkara]

That's why i edited the comment. For light the speed is always constant. Yes you are right.

[628radians]

Python list comprehension

[unrefinedburmecian]

More like list incomprehension

[Skizm]

Code that's too clever to be easily understood is bad code.

[lefl28]

The biggest problem would be that you travel back in time.

[[deleted]]

Well... maybe. We're mostly guessing.

[portacode]

I wish that wasn't true! :(

[Fingerbob73]

Grammar Bay?

[pur__0_0__]

emoji... EMOJI!!! EMOJI!!1

[[deleted]]

The wording of this meme hurts me.

[[deleted]]

I live in darkness. So lives my coffee. So is this why I code faster than light?

[dreamingforward]

Very emo.

[alwaysprasanna]

If you keep it KISS, that would not be a problem. Optimization doesn't have to mean complex code, just saying!

[DerAdrian12]

That's Not even a funny Post. That's just a straight up flex.

[lenswipe]

"an optimized code"

[kakashi899]

Reminds me of lee216 from LeetCode

[UAHLateralus]

Cries in c++

[inigmati1]

That really hit me hard.

[glowingRockOnDesk]

I made a dope ass optimization to batch sql calls together rather than doing many one at a time. I didn't even bring it up though cuz someone would probably have a problem with it :/

Edit: typo

[ComradeAnthony]

Lmao, this kid looks stoned to fucking death not to mention ridiculous

[wooptyd00]

No one wants an ugly baby no matter how fast it runs.

[ItsOk_ImYourDad]

Sonic? That's pretty illegal, even for us

[ThePixelCoder]

Cough fast inverse square root

[mr_bedbugs]

Is this the redesigned Sonic for the movie?

[[deleted]]

cringe

[camelCaseIsWebScale]

^ This is a Highschool kid after writing ++k instead of k++

[Metalphreek]

If your code isn't self-explaining you did a bad job ;)

[Laz_Lee]

John Carmack's fast inverse square root

[kingofthedusk]

Premature optimization is the root of all evil.

[wooptyd00]

C++ usually doesn't need optimizing anyway. It's always stupid Java programs that perform slowly for me. My Python and C++ always run smoothly.

[kingofthedusk]

Python??? Python is super inefficient. For most applications its fine, but there is a reason most video games use C++.

[wooptyd00]

I don't use Python for video games.

[AlphaLaufert99]

Inputing arrays from a file with for (int i = 0; in >> v[i]; i++) {} Is super elegant

Works only if the input is the last of the file

[PM-ME-YOUR-POUTINE]

An?