Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Charlie Stross

@blacklight Only 69Kb of RAM? So I'm guessing you never ran VisiCalc on a 48Kb Apple II …

9 comments
Dan Neuman

@cstross @blacklight I still optimize for memory when I code. It’s a hard habit to break.

Alan Langford

@dan613 @cstross @blacklight The amount of time it's taken me to accept that compilers actually do a good job of optimization these days and thus that I can abandon various constructs to help them out has been considerable. Except ++var over var++. That' still sometimes a thing.

David J. Atkinson #🟦

@blacklight @dan613 @alan @cstross Most processors are ill-suited to the highly dynamic list-oriented data structures that are prevalent in semantic/conceptual AI programs (as opposed to the matrix operations common to associative AI, e.g., LLMs). Until we have reliable processor-in-memory (PIM), developers will still need to optimize memory management.

David J. Atkinson #🟦

@dan613 @cstross @blacklight As you should. Memory management has been a long time source of dynamic runtime errors. I would cast a skeptical eye towards anyone who says compilers handle memory optimization just fine.

katrina

@blacklight @dan613 @cstross I optimise for speed wherever there is a trade-off between the two. For example you could not store an intermediate result and recalculate it every time you need it. That would save memory but use more CPU cycles.

Anna Nicholson

@cstross @blacklight 48 KiB? Ha! πŸ˜‰

I used Visicalc on a *32 KiB* CBM 8032!

Anna Nicholson

@cstross @blacklight To be fair, though, if I walked round the back of it, it didn’t automatically turn to face me πŸ˜‚

Paul

@transponderings @cstross @blacklight

There's a bit of difference between -using- it on 32KB or coding it on 32KB. ;-)

I'm a programmer from 'that generation'.

Go Up