4 ms·
Randomization at this level would be too expensive. There are tools that do this for debug purposes, and your stuff runs a lot slower in that mode.
by frollogaston 2y ago
Randomization at this level would be too expensive. There are tools that do this for debug purposes, and your stuff runs a lot slower in that mode.
- foxhill 2y agoit probably shouldn’t be a “release” thing. actually, certainly. i do wonder how many bugs would never have seen the light of day, if someone’s “set” actually turned out to be a sequence (i.e. allowed duplicate values) resulting in a debug build raising an assert.
- Arainach 2y agoDebug builds are worthless for catching issues. How many people actually run them? Perhaps developers run debug builds of individual binaries they're working on when they're trying to repro a bug, but my experience at every company of every size and position in the stack (including the Windows team) is that no one does their general purpose use on a debug build.
- dontlaugh 2y agoEspecially in games, it’s common for only the highly optimised release builds to have playable performance.
- frollogaston 2y agoYeah, even their integration tests will probably run in opt mode.
- throwaway2037 2y agoI had to Google to find the tid bit that I read about Perl years ago. I think this will affect iteration order of dicts. > Nov 22, 2012 — Perl 5.18 will introduce per process hash randomization and almost certainly will feature a new hash function.