5 ms·

users=db.get("SELECT name FROM users WHERE group='admin'") is more efficient and understandable then: users=[]; tmp=db.get("SELECT name,group FROM use

by itry 12y ago

users=db.get("SELECT name FROM users WHERE group='admin'") is more efficient and understandable then: users=[]; tmp=db.get("SELECT name,group FROM users") for (i=0;i<tmp.count();i++) { if (tmp[i]['group']=='admin') users[]=tmp[i][name]; }

CodeCube 12y ago
This is where a good abstraction layer can pay dividends. Of course, a bad abstraction layer (as evidenced by Spolsky's "leaky abstraction" post (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html) http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.htm...) on the opposite hand can add immeasurable cost.
abritishguy 12y ago
But who in their right mind would do the second one? Obviously you can make code both less efficient and less readable. But starting with code that a competent programmer has written, I find it seldom makes it more readable when you make it more efficient.
- michael_h 12y ago
  But who in their right mind would do the second one? Oh abritishguy, I can assure you that the world is awash in such magical code snippets.
  - abritishguy 12y ago
    > competent programmer
    - angersock 12y ago
      It's amazing the sorts of things otherwise sharp programmers will write when they're tired, hurried, and devoting cycles to more interesting/complicated parts of an implementation.
    - mseebach 12y ago
      > true scotsman
- autokad 12y ago
  i tend to agree. take dijkstra's algorith implemented with a fibonacci heap or something very simple like for i = 1 to 100 if x = this do that and something with i else something else with i easy to read, less efficient than: if x = this for i = 1 to 100 do that and something with i else for i = 1 to 100 do something else with i from my experience, compilers usually dont hoist very well edit: sorry, spaces didnt come out well
- mtdewcmu 12y ago
  >>But who in their right mind would do the second one? Surely you jest. I don't know who, but their handiwork is everywhere.
- pjc50 12y ago
  People using ORM can end up writing the second one without it being obvious.
edgyswingset 12y ago
Not to mention, you'd never write code like the second one in a .NET ecosystem, unless you were purposefully trying to write bad, unmaintainable code.

by itry 12y ago

CodeCube 12y ago

This is where a good abstraction layer can pay dividends. Of course, a bad abstraction layer (as evidenced by Spolsky's "leaky abstraction" post (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html) http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.htm...) on the opposite hand can add immeasurable cost.

abritishguy 12y ago

But who in their right mind would do the second one? Obviously you can make code both less efficient and less readable. But starting with code that a competent programmer has written, I find it seldom makes it more readable when you make it more efficient.

michael_h 12y ago
But who in their right mind would do the second one? Oh abritishguy, I can assure you that the world is awash in such magical code snippets.
- abritishguy 12y ago
  > competent programmer
  - angersock 12y ago
    It's amazing the sorts of things otherwise sharp programmers will write when they're tired, hurried, and devoting cycles to more interesting/complicated parts of an implementation.
  - mseebach 12y ago
    > true scotsman
autokad 12y ago
i tend to agree. take dijkstra's algorith implemented with a fibonacci heap or something very simple like for i = 1 to 100 if x = this do that and something with i else something else with i easy to read, less efficient than: if x = this for i = 1 to 100 do that and something with i else for i = 1 to 100 do something else with i from my experience, compilers usually dont hoist very well edit: sorry, spaces didnt come out well
mtdewcmu 12y ago
>>But who in their right mind would do the second one? Surely you jest. I don't know who, but their handiwork is everywhere.
pjc50 12y ago
People using ORM can end up writing the second one without it being obvious.

edgyswingset 12y ago

Not to mention, you'd never write code like the second one in a .NET ecosystem, unless you were purposefully trying to write bad, unmaintainable code.