News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Potato paradox by wobbleblob on Thursday July 16, 2015 @04:42AM (#9896023)
Without knowing your code, I can think of a performance hack to get the running time of f() down to less than 10% of the time.
Re:Potato paradox by blueblob on Thursday July 16, 2015 @09:44AM (#9897090)
Me too, move all the code from f() to g() and never call f(). I got the performance of f() down to 0%!
Re:Potato paradox by JupiterMoon on Thursday July 16, 2015 @04:55AM (#9896065)
What is this?
Re:Potato paradox by andrelaszlo on Thursday July 16, 2015 @04:59AM (#9896081)
Slowing down the rest of the program? :)
Re:Potato paradox by wobbleblob on Thursday July 16, 2015 @05:15AM (#9896130)
Well yeah, just add a wait loop somewhere else
Re:Potato paradox by eCa on Thursday July 16, 2015 @06:17AM (#9896304)
I thought they were speed-up loops...

http://thedailywtf.com/articles/The-Speedup-Loop

Re:Potato paradox by ryangittins on Thursday July 16, 2015 @09:30AM (#9897013)
Hah, this is great! It reminds me of the classic

  static char buffer[1024*1024*2];
story from a few years back.

http://www.dodgycoder.net/2012/02/coding-tricks-of-game-deve...

Re:Potato paradox by stcredzero on Thursday July 16, 2015 @11:05AM (#9897639)
From CToGD:

In other words, when a project gets handed down from above to launch in, say, 3 months, there's no way in hell you can get the servers requisitioned, approved, and installed in that time. It became standard practice for each team to slightly over-request server capacity with each project and throwing the excess hosts into a rainy day pool, immediately available and repurposeable as required.

I know of a Social Security Administration acquisition back in the days of 100 MHz processors. The bureaucracy took so long with this, by the time the order could be put out to suppliers, 100 MHz processors were no longer available, so SSA ended up with a bunch of workstations that were 166 MHz processors down-clocked to 100 MHz. (Otherwise, they would have had to start the whole process over again.)

Re:Potato paradox by h_o on Thursday July 16, 2015 @08:11AM (#9896685)
That is pure genius. Some very forward thinking there.
Re:Potato paradox by ivank on Thursday July 16, 2015 @06:25AM (#9896332)
Or make 10 copies of f and call one at random