4 ms·
And it is, though, not among a set of hashtable implementations you assumed. It is quite similar with how you wrote "fastest" instead "fastest among all existi
by elmigranto 10y ago
And it is, though, not among a set of hashtable implementations you assumed.
It is quite similar with how you wrote "fastest" instead "fastest among all existing publicly available implementations". Nothing wrong with that, since it is obvious from context, very much the same way it is obvious from article what author means.
- Ono-Sendai 10y agoit's a bullshit clickbait title.
- saalweachter 10y agoAs the author explains right off the bat, it's a logical clickbait title. He wrote three blog posts: "I wrote a fast hashtable", "I wrote a faster hashtable", "I wrote the fastest hashtable". I mean, I'd still call it clickbait, but it's hardly bullshit clickbait.
- cat199 10y agothere is a difference?
- attractivechaos 10y agoIn the text, it is fine to say "fastest" because there is a context, but in the title, "fastest" means above everything else in the world because the context has not been established yet to readers. If you read news with "fastest" in the title (e.g. fastest CPU or fastest compiler), it really means the fastest in the world at the time of publication. The author could just say "very fast" or "faster than common hash table libraries" in the title. The current title, IMHO, undermines the quality of the post (which is actually good).
- cat199 10y agoBut I'm the context! Geez.
- attractivechaos 10y agoThe title of this post has been changed to "my fastest" after I wrote my previous comment. The original post is still "the fastest". There was no context.