qsort

30 ms·

481.
by qsort 3y ago
> the weird beliefs I'm an atheist and a materialist so I share basically nothing of that kind of worldview, but those beliefs aren't actually that much outside the mainstream. The Holy Ghost as the third person of the trinity
482.
by qsort 3y ago
Graphs are such a general concept that if you squint everything is a graph. Your example works just as well with structs and member fields, we don't even need the OO hypothesis.
483.
by qsort 3y ago
The basic method would be to assign a number, 0 through 52!-1, to each permutation in lexicographic order. Because 52! is not a power of 2, if you want to encode binary bits, you can only use 2^N permutations, where that number is the large
484.
by qsort 3y ago
I don't understand the claim that this is more efficient, it's trivial to find a method that's information-theoretically optimal: choose an arbitrary order for the cards, and encode log(52!)/log(2) bits as the lexicograp
485.
by qsort 3y ago
Sagemath isn't a python library, it's a collection of packages (of which sympy is one) under a common interface. It is indeed what you would use if you wanted to do real symbolic computation in python, but it's not at the lev
486.
by qsort 3y ago
Stephen Wolfram notwithstanding, Mathematica is still far ahead of most alternatives as a CAS. Maple is good on some integrals. Their downsides are that their languages are not very well suited as general purpose languages, many times the a
487.
by qsort 3y ago
What the article calls "loci" satisfy the axioms of an affine space, with the exception (for example in the case of pointer arithmetic) that the base set might not be a field but only a ring, and therefore it would be a "pseu
488.
by qsort 3y ago
I see the point but I think the article is overplaying its hand. Sacrificing performance for a cleaner programming model is a reasonable tradeoff, it's weird that it's being criticized as though it were a matter of principle. I&#x
489.
by qsort 3y ago
Agreed. I'm very much not on the LLM hype-train, but I've been saying from day one that I'd really like something like this. Code has strong local similarities, so it's not far fetched to imagine that future LLMs -- if n
490.
by qsort 3y ago
The difference is that CPUs/GPUs are deterministic. You can write software and it will always work, and it will be composable. It's kind of "disappointing" that for so many problems the "winning" approach seems
491.
by qsort 3y ago
I'm honestly wondering if it's some sort of parody? The part about games is also very weird. The machine that beat Kasparov was Deep Blue, not Big Blue (a nickname for IBM itself), and it was almost entirely brute force search IIR
492.
by qsort 3y ago
Yeah, seems like I got that right. That graduate-level course must have worked. But then: (f (g (h (g z)))) results in: ((((1 * 2) + 5) * 2) * 3) = ... not 17? while it would work if the type of f was corrected. Or, again,
493.
by qsort 3y ago
Because while you could definitely find out who I am, I don't necessarily want this account to be the first thing that comes out if someone googles my name. Bonus points for ungooglable usernames.
494.
by qsort 3y ago
Is that supposed to be a P((n+3)) in the type of "f" for the second case or am I misunderstanding this hard?
495.
by qsort 3y ago
Judging from the fashionable nonsense in the homepage, this looks more like it's the Juicero stage of product development.
496.
by qsort 3y ago
I've worked on a similar problem and we have pretty much the same issues as you. An idea that makes things better is having an intermediate representation that exposes the key tables of your dwh and gets compiled to SQL. This allows yo
497.
by qsort 3y ago
It's not meant to be a scientifically rigorous test, but the idea is this. It seems like you're accepting that (at least in its current state, barring unknowable future discoveries) this is a technology that complements developers
498.
by qsort 3y ago
> Can an average programmer using GPT4 as a tool solve Advent of Code faster than an equally-skilled programmer without an LLM? I mean, yes, obviously? Any tool, even if it had near-zero marginal utility must necessarily improve performa
499.
by qsort 3y ago
> considerable effort on making it less LLM-friendly this year Wastl himself denied that this is the case[1]. This is a lie. > Other tasks required studying the input data Always been the case for AoC, how is that different from other
500.
by qsort 3y ago
Comes as a big monolithical block that's much harder to work with if you have to develop bigger systems, language tooling is lacking even compared to something like Python that's already mediocre, in many aspects (data analysis&#x
501.
by qsort 3y ago
*μ-Wolframs
502.
by qsort 3y ago
I mean, it really is good software. It's by far the best CAS around and the "standard library" is extremely impressive. But like all software it involves tradeoffs. Fanatics of any technology or idea are never the easiest p
503.
by qsort 3y ago
Me neither, but I know what the process is like from having co-authored some stuff at work. This is not the kind of review you get if the paper is simply not good enough. Those are some seriously pissed off reviewers. Compare for example wi
504.
by qsort 3y ago
These reviews are brutal . It's basically science-speak for "the paper is utter trash". "The main claim [...] is both somewhat obvious and previously already stated" "Many pieces of writing are overly assertiv
505.
by qsort 3y ago
Legal hurdles + not a lot of interest, probably. People who are willing to spend time to learn a game usually "converge" on games where there's a large community, and pretty much every popular game under the sun that's i
506.
by qsort 3y ago
I agree with TFA, it's the ecosystem. You're not entirely wrong that free is a component, because impossibly draconian licensing terms means no ecosystem. I still maintain that Python, when evaluated strictly on its merits as a pr
507.
by qsort 3y ago
Agreed, the aggregations chosen here are embarrassingly parallel, you just keep the count to aggregate means. Would have been more interesting with something like median/k-th percentile, or some other aggregation not as easy.
508.
by qsort 3y ago
If they come in a library or as part of the language, that's an even better reason why you should understand how they work. If you live in a world where a line of code assigns a variable or dereferences a pointer or emits adds and imul
509.
by qsort 3y ago
The entire point of quicksort is that it doesn't allocate and its inner loop is very tight (especially if you don't use Lomuto partitioning -- they teach Lomuto partitioning in school because the proof of correctness is easier). W
510.
by qsort 3y ago
Wow, thanks! I'll check it out.

More ›