No, not clear, rigorous. The thread on the performance of the inverse square root and how optimization compiles to different execution makes that point well. The only trick is how to trade clarity for rigor when popularizing.
On 1/25/21 3:30 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Geez, barry. And I thought I had made it up. I was just teasing. In my > line of work (I think of myself ultimately as a writer) the burden of proof > is always with the generator of the text. I assume that nobody has time to > mess with acronyms. If I want to be understood, I have to be clear. I > assume it’s the same with programming. TRIAR. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
