4 ms·

So optimising code feels like playing chess now?

• logicallee 9y ago
  did you mean because computers can do it better? I can't see anything else in their comment that you could have referred to, but the quoted part shows that the author did it better than the compiler output...
  • jacobush 9y ago
    No, not really. I meant by the prose description of how to optimise the code. It felt like how chess masters may discuss their strategies after a game of chess. Very high level and far from what a layperson may really understand about chess (or optimising), but very true and distinct nonetheless. It gives a glimpse into the mind of the chess master (or optimiser) even when you yourself don't possess these skills.
    • logicallee 9y ago
      Oh okay. I see the similarity now - it does look like prose discussion of chess games. The analogy can be pretty deep, like strategic considerations ("opposite-colored bishops" vs "spread-out dependent instructions" in the prose you replied to). Thanks for the clarification, this was insightful.
• qznc 9y ago
  It is not "optimising" because nobody even hopes for something "optimal". Now? For a long time x86/amd64 performance is quite unpredictable because the CPUs are so complex. It is not like chess. More like Poker because more uncertainty.
  • thethirdone 9y ago
    > It is not "optimising" because nobody even hopes for something "optimal". Optimizing doesn't need to reach the optimal, just improve. > It is not like chess. More like Poker because more uncertainty. I would say the uncertainty is similar to chess. It isn't feasible to know the best option in any given situation, but it is deterministic.