3 ms·

Assembly is hardly the reason this is fast. It is necessary to this solution but by no means sufficient. Extreme algorithmic research combined with a high LOK

Assembly is hardly the reason this is fast. It is necessary to this solution but by no means sufficient. Extreme algorithmic research combined with a high LOK of Linux syscalls and platform specific optimizations is what allows this to exist. To quote the author, Alex Smith, himself: > @chx: I already have a master's thesis. This was harder. This is in a different universe than what can be produced by simply "do it in assembly".

wheelerof4te 3y ago
"Extreme algorithmic research combined with a high LOK of Linux syscalls and platform specific optimizations is what allows this to exist." No, author's extreme boredom and/or free time allowed this to exist. Nothing else.
moreati 3y ago
What's LOK in this context? Search and Wikipedia didn't throw up anything. Thanks.
- bonzini 3y ago
  Level of knowledge, I think.
  - nickelpro 3y ago
    Correct. It's one of those extremely-common-in-the-US-military-almost-no-usage-outside-it type things apparently, like behoove or tack (hyphen) or diggit (multi-tool), which I'll keep in mind in the future.
bonzini 3y ago
The second ranked solution (by me :)) shows that a more or less trivial assembly tight loop can get about 70% of the speed. The remaining 30% is... something else.