4 ms·
Much like Chuck Norris references in movies from 2004, I get the sense that this advice is a product of its time. One of those “it makes more sense if you were
by dceddia 4y ago
Much like Chuck Norris references in movies from 2004, I get the sense that this advice is a product of its time. One of those “it makes more sense if you were there” things. (It even starts off acknowledging that it’s an article about current trends!) Not to say it doesn’t generally still hold true, but this part stuck out to me:
> Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying about, the speed of non-critical parts of their programs
I don’t think this is widely true today (outside e.g. game development anyway). If it were, we’d probably have lots of fast software that’s very hard to read! But computers were a lot slower then, compilers weren’t as advanced, and it would make a lot of sense if performance was top of mind for most programmers at the time.
- bqmjjx0kac 4y ago> I don’t think this is widely true today (outside e.g. game development anyway). If it were, we’d probably have lots of fast software that’s very hard to read! I think the point was that programmers' intuition about performance is wrong. So we'd wind up with a lot of slow, buggy software — buggy because the code became hard to read when it was prematurely optimized.