Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Your skill will accomplish
what the force of many cannot
 
PerlMonks  

Re^6: 5x6-bit values into/out of a 32-bit word

by BrowserUk (Pope)
on Mar 19, 2007 at 14:27 UTC ( #605488=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^5: 5x6-bit values into/out of a 32-bit word
in thread 5x6-bit values into/out of a 32-bit word

That's all very well, but there is no context upon which you could conclude that there is any merit whatsoever in prematurely generalising the stated problem.

And in context, which as the writer of the OP I am uniquely qualified to judge, the is no chance that the requirements will ever change from 5x6-bit values. None.

The underlying system that the problem models has been unchanged for at least 500, likely 600 and possibly 700 years. It ain't gonna change now, so the misbegotten computer pseudoscience of premature generalisation will achieve exactly naught.

With the greatest of respect to my countryman, his sweeping generalisation of 40-odd years ago has been misused and abused so frequently in the intervening period, to the point where I think that outside of the rarefied atmosphere of academia and pure research, it's true meaning has been lost.

I contend that in the modern world of commercial development, more money has been spent and wasted; more God-object hierarchies have been developed and discarded; and more development time wasted in pursuit of the premature generalisation than was ever the case with premature optimisation up to the time when he draughted his dictum.


Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.


Comment on Re^6: 5x6-bit values into/out of a 32-bit word
Re^7: 5x6-bit values into/out of a 32-bit word
by grinder (Bishop) on Mar 19, 2007 at 20:23 UTC

    Jeez man, did you forget to take your medication or something? Of course there was no context to conclude anything, since "How would you do this in Perl" doesn't give us very much to go on. Is it any wonder that you only received two and a half responses (I count ikegami's as a half, I don't think (s)he'd mind).

    Normally, these sorts of challenges draw dozens of different responses, and there is much to study and learn. I don't know if it's the general decline of Perlmonks, the fact that you posted the question on a weekend, or that that the question sucked, but I was very surprised that only two useful responses were made.

    So of the two responses, I came up with what I thought was a nice solution that plays to Perl's strengths, short, idiomatic and easily reused in other contexts. I conceived with absolutely not the slightest consideration to performance issues, and people are giving me grief about premature optimisation? Give me a break.

    I contended that Thelonius's solution should be flagged with a red flag, because it contains repetitive code that could be factored out (and Thelonius admits that the point is generally valid). In the absence of any other hints whatsoever in the initial post as to what purpose this code server, I maintain that my solution is better. It may well be that Thelonius's solution is technically superior, performs better and so on. But you gave no method for discriminating between proposed solutions and now you're moaning about premature "generalisation". Yeah right. Remind me not to reply to your questions in the future.

    • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl

      I don't know if it's the general decline of Perlmonks ...

      If you are looking for a reason, then you might consider that ~80% of your words in this subthread are totally unrelated to the technical issues I raised about your post.

      That's the crux of the problem. PM has become stifling of the technical debate that once made this place such a joy to frequent. There are a core of insiders here that have rendered this place insufferable to anyone not prepared to take their opinions, judgements and edicts as law. Instead of being prepared to argue the technical merits of their opinions, they, as you did, resort to ad homonym attacks, suggestions of drug abuse or mental infirmity, and any other dubious tactic to disguise the fact that they are unable to support their positions thought rational argument.

      It has rendered this place a ghost town as far as original thought or counter argument are concerned, which leaves it devoid of interest for anyone who has moved beyond the FAQ.


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://605488]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-09-17 01:50 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (56 votes), past polls