We’re looking at neither. I even double checked the article and it’s very explicitly an example demonstrating very clearly a concept. It’s a proof of concept. I

We’re looking at neither. I even double checked the article and it’s very explicitly an example demonstrating very clearly a concept. It’s a proof of concept. It’s not a design so it won’t suffer from a flaw, it’s not expected to be profiled because it’s not a solution. My comment was an aside that such code lacking design can aid profiling other code. Intentionally writing poorly performing code has benefits in understanding other performance details in some scenarios. You didn’t seem to address this either, just reiterated a grievance with the article. I expect this is going to be a typical HN topic where strong opinions fly by, but I sincerely wonder if you might also benefit from slowing down and reading more closely?