Hacker News Reader

Comment by londons_explore | Hacker News Reader

> it turns an optimization done out of technical necessity into a gameplay feature

And this folks is why an optimizing compiler can never beat sufficient quantities of human optimization.

The human can decide when the abstraction layers should be deliberately broken for performance reasons. A compiler cannot do that.

View on HN

The LEA-vs-shift thread here kind of proves the point. Compilers are insanely good at that stuff now. Where they completely fall short is data layout. I had a message parser using `std::map<int, std::string>` for field lookup and the fix was just... a flat array indexed by tag number. No compiler is ever going to suggest that. Same deal with allocation. I spent a while messing with SIMD scanning and consteval tricks chasing latency, and the single biggest win turned out to be boring. Switched from per-message heap allocs to a pre-allocated buffer with `std::span` views into the original data. ~12 allocations per message down to zero. Compiler will optimize the hell out of your allocator code, it just won't tell you to stop calling it.

Agreed. It really requires an understanding of not just the software and computer it's running on, but the goal the combined system was meant to accomplish. Maybe some of us are starting to feed that sort of information into LLMs as part of spec-driven development, and maybe an LLM of tomorrow will be capable of noticing and exploiting such optimizations.

End-to-end optimization in action! Although I'd've liked more than 1 example (pathfinding) here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com