Good night. Have a good trip!
Good night. Have a good trip!
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Thanks! Going home for spring break.Originally Posted by Particle
About to head to the airport. Guess I'll be spending the time on the plane migrating the program to the new thread API that I just knocked up.
(If I can manage to open up my 17-in. laptop on a seat tray...)
Then I'll tweak the validation to make it less sensitive to clock variation...
(I might need your help for this, since I don't have a system with a very imprecise hardware timer like yours - assuming that's the problem.)
The last thing I have planned for v0.5.3 is a new conversion algorithm.
It's based on the same approach that was used to set the current Pi record and is 3 - 4x faster than one I'm currently using. So I guess the credit goes Fabrice Ballard for coming up with such an ingenious algorithm... (or whoever he got the idea from)
I doubt I'll finish this before I get back to school, since I'll probably be spending the whole break fixing my workstation and getting trashed with my high school friends...
With this new algorithm, the program should be 10 - 20% faster.
This gives me room to insert some new redundancy checks without making v0.5.3 any slower than v0.5.2.
Last edited by poke349; 03-20-2010 at 08:22 AM. Reason: typo fix
Main Machine:
AMD FX8350 @ stock --- 16 GB DDR3 @ 1333 MHz --- Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0 --- 2.0 TB Seagate
Miscellaneous Workstations for Code-Testing:
Intel Core i7 4770K @ 4.0 GHz --- 32 GB DDR3 @ 1866 MHz --- Asus Z87-Plus --- 1.5 TB (boot) --- 4 x 1 TB + 4 x 2 TB (swap)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks