3 ms·
>Running it on a timer actually works quite well. It would seem we have an existence proof now saying that the above statement is incorrect.
by natch 7y ago
>Running it on a timer actually works quite well.
It would seem we have an existence proof now saying that the above statement is incorrect.
- melq 7y agoBecause one specific implementation seems to have failed a test run?
- pc86 7y agoLet's compare the number of instances a timer has caused an issue and the number of instances it hasn't to determine the actual rate before we make a broad assumption about a field we have no experience in due to a single test case, yes?
- natch 7y agoYeah I’m a programmer like most of us here and I’ve seen timers abused quite a lot. They sometimes are appropriate, but more often, they are good examples of an antipattern. The wording “it would seem” should have tipped you off that no assumptions are being made, but I guess it didn’t work. And even if we were to make a comparison as you suggest and derive some ratio, that’s not super useful without comparing it to the ratio for some alternative approach that does not use timers.