|
1. Put on some music.
2. Enjoy the music.
3. ???
4. After about five minutes realize I forgot to turn on my speakers 
Must be a slow Sunday morning... 
|
|
|
|
|
Clearly you have a braincast music system, and your speakers are redundant.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
That would be so cool.
You could always be listening to music without others hearing it.
Unfortunately, I don't have such a system and it's more likely that my brains are currently redundant...
|
|
|
|
|
Do you mean, when! it works...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
It took me two hours to get this joke... Which proves your point
The ! thoroughly confused me (w * h * e * (n * m * l * k...)?  )
|
|
|
|
|
The best way to enjoy a music is not to hear it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to be OK (without reading this...)
|
|
|
|
|
Have you seen Sander's tastes in music?
The only way to win is not to play.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
After much discussion we've chosen to play Orthrelm - OV[^] because we think it will help patients to relax 
|
|
|
|
|
In fact they will be so relaxed because they are dead after that 
|
|
|
|
|
You can't be stressed if you're dead and you won't need the surgery either, it's a win-win
|
|
|
|
|
The symptoms you describe are not surprising, given the music you listen to 
p.s. the only known cure requires a year of total silence.
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
I listen to a very wide variety of music, so I have no idea what you mean... Could it be the classical music? 
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 12-Aug-19 8:17am.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 12-Aug-19 8:17am.
|
|
|
|
|
as if LALR(1) table generation wasn't ugly enough, the operation takes *minutes* to generate tables for on my machine for the Javascript grammar i'm using.
Gold is faster at that, and I largely know why, but it still takes a long time.
So now I get to take this nasty, CPU bound op and spread it across multiple cores.
And i have no idea where I'm going to start. This is a bear, and everything is interdependent.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Have a look at OpenMP[^]. It is very easy to use.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
I'm fine using tasks. It's more about where to break the algorithm apart - I'd need to solve that with OpenMP too, but thanks for the head's up.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Adding extra brackets around your single-line if-statements will greatly improve performance 
|
|
|
|
|
LIES!
Brackets Braces take CPU cycles
Edit: Now look what you've done. you've got me calling braces brackets.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
If the computer sees you've put good effort into your code it will do a good effort to run it 
Currently your computer is running the same way you've written your code, which is "meh, whatever, no braces no performance"
It's science, duh!
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I just made it a whole lot faster by removing spurious braces.
Seriously though, I did speed it up a lot by implementing a remedial cache, but it's still slow.
Now I'm just reporting progress as I go. That should help.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the monster, codewitch wrote: I did speed it up a lot by implementing a remedial cache
My #1 goto when I've got some slow running code 
I once gained a performance boost by removing a method and putting the code in the calling method instead.
I think it was a loop, so instead of:
foreach (var item in items)
{
Method(item);
}
private void Method(Item item)
{
}I got:
foreach (var item in items)
{
}It went from over a second to a few milliseconds.
I'm not sure why there was such a performance penalty in invoking the method (probably a few thousand times).
It was an older version of .NET anyway, either 3.5 or 4(.0), I've never seen it since.
If you're dealing with an ORM, going to a manually written query (or completely ditching the ORM at that point) can also greatly boost performance.
And the difference between a debug build and a production build can sometimes be pretty big as well.
Fixing performance bottlenecks can be fun and rewarding, but it can also be a real PITA
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
