olliemath

6 ms·

1.
by olliemath 2y ago
Actually most of the LLMs algos are less efficient than the readable human one, even with only two nested loops. Only one of them precalculates the factors which makes the biggest difference (there are log2(N) factors, worst case, for large
2.
by olliemath 2y ago
I've used pypy on large codebases for years. Generally it's fine so long as you don't need any of the packages that are thin wrappers around C/fortran. It seems a lot of maintainers these days are pretty good about consi
3.
by olliemath 2y ago
Speaking as somebody who has had to debug why servers were ignoring changes to the configs in our git repos, this is a welcome change. It's a shame there are ways to bypass it, but at least it communicates the intent: you aren't s
4.
by olliemath 3y ago
zoxide is great - in fact I tend to just alias cd to zoxide in my bashrc
5.
by olliemath 5y ago
Very nice! We spent quite some time on this and aren't even having a kid. How did you implement the tournament? It feels very long when you have many names - almost like it's doing all N^2 pairs, or is there something smarter? EDI
6.
by olliemath 5y ago
Pure python - under pypy - on my system faster than all of the above :D
7.
by olliemath 6y ago
Yes. I had pretty much this conversation a while back with some non-technically minded people who had been convinced that by creating an ontology and set of "semantic business rules" - a lot of the writing of actual code could be
8.
Requests per Second: a realistic look at Python web frameworks(suade.org)
2 points by olliemath 6y ago|0 comments
9.
by olliemath 6y ago
We use pypy pretty extensively at our firm for analytics/olap work. We've actually tried using some of the more traditional libs (Pandas et al) with CPython, but there's always a pure-python bottleneck (e.g. SQLAlchemy). Perf