4 ms·
Yeah, you could easily argue (as I've had many, many bosses do) that the final version is objectively worse as it's doubtful that it will save as much time as i
by commandlinefan 8y ago
Yeah, you could easily argue (as I've had many, many bosses do) that the final version is objectively worse as it's doubtful that it will save as much time as it cost to develop (and debug - I doubt he got it right on the first pass!) and will drive in ongoing maintenance: the first version is simple and easy to understand (but inefficient) while the final version is almost impenetrable unless you read through the whole blog post, which is probably not part of source code control.
- kemiller2002 8y agoThe perfect is the enemy of the good. For a few hundred dollars I can buy more memory etc. that I can use over and over again. The time that is sunk into building it to make it more efficient is gone forever. Admittedly, I liked the write up. It's a fun exercise to go over, but I would ask my devs to go with the original program.
- cityhomesteader 8y agoIn a similar strain. Premature optimization is the root of all evil. - Knuth
- girvo 8y agoHere is the larger quote: “We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%.”
- ant6n 8y agoYou can't buy memory on your user's devices.