3 ms·

A bit tangential, but the folks behind the GNU Multiple Precision Library (GMPLib) have the problem of choosing algorithms more or less fleshed out. They've got

A bit tangential, but the folks behind the GNU Multiple Precision Library (GMPLib) have the problem of choosing algorithms more or less fleshed out. They've got some fairly approachable manual pages[1] for the various algorithms they use as operand sizes scale up, where Karatsuba is only the second of six options in terms of operational complexity. [1] https://gmplib.org/manual/Multiplication-Algorithms https://gmplib.org/manual/Multiplication-Algorithms

inigyou 3mo ago
This really demonstrates the utility of pulling in a library written by experts in the field the library handles.
- Bratmon 3mo ago
  This is a problem I have a lot in modern programming ecosystems: How do I tell the difference between a library written by a team of experts who have spent decades optimizing everything to do with the task and a library written by one guy that's an unnecessary straightforward wrapper over the obvious implementation?
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - dspillett 3mo ago
    Or increasingly, a library written by an LLM referencing a pile of such “one guy” projects of varying levels of suck (from actually good to good-got-it-is-full-of-suck).
    - spullara 3mo ago
      What I have been seeing recently is having a great LLM rewrite the library leads to fewer bugs and also optimized for your use case. More expensive for sure than pulling something like epub.js but when the library has infinite open issues it can be a lot better.
  - layer8 3mo ago
    You defer to the advice of experts you trust. Which somehow have become harder to come by in terms of signal to noise than 20-30 years ago.
  - xtajv 2mo ago
    1. Read the code 2. Don't. Encapsulate and put yourself in a position to swap out the implementation at will. (Maybe you'll swap out an unnecessary dependency for a simple helper function of your own).
    - Bratmon 2mo ago
      But if I followed that advice here, I would say "Obviously I don't need a library to multiply numbers" and miss the decades of research and optimization.

inigyou 3mo ago

This really demonstrates the utility of pulling in a library written by experts in the field the library handles.

Bratmon 3mo ago
This is a problem I have a lot in modern programming ecosystems: How do I tell the difference between a library written by a team of experts who have spent decades optimizing everything to do with the task and a library written by one guy that's an unnecessary straightforward wrapper over the obvious implementation?
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- dspillett 3mo ago
  Or increasingly, a library written by an LLM referencing a pile of such “one guy” projects of varying levels of suck (from actually good to good-got-it-is-full-of-suck).
  - spullara 3mo ago
    What I have been seeing recently is having a great LLM rewrite the library leads to fewer bugs and also optimized for your use case. More expensive for sure than pulling something like epub.js but when the library has infinite open issues it can be a lot better.
- layer8 3mo ago
  You defer to the advice of experts you trust. Which somehow have become harder to come by in terms of signal to noise than 20-30 years ago.
- xtajv 2mo ago
  1. Read the code 2. Don't. Encapsulate and put yourself in a position to swap out the implementation at will. (Maybe you'll swap out an unnecessary dependency for a simple helper function of your own).
  - Bratmon 2mo ago
    But if I followed that advice here, I would say "Obviously I don't need a library to multiply numbers" and miss the decades of research and optimization.