I mean, I don’t personally.

Vafiadis: Tcsc_: I doubt it would help much for the frame stuff though, it’s more useful for complex data operations

Paulhus: Vafiadis: here a reference of tools or dialogues u can launch via console. u may find some of them useful . http://bit.ly/Paulhus-dos-windows-commands i did

Vafiadis: Paulhus: hehe thanks, I’ll keep a copy for next time I’m working in windows-land

Vafiadis: Tcsc_: http://jlongster.com/Transducers.js-Round-2-with-Benchmarks – “baseline” are the manual/”for loop” implemenatations

Mickelson: Vafiadis: what i mean by profiler noise is that seqiterator1, 2, 3, composemapx = x + 1, filterx = x % 2 === 0 is not going to give you good information when you look at the profiler

Nishio: The transducer will seduce ya!

Vafiadis: Tcsc_: yeah, I can see that being an issue

Vafiadis: Any kind of lazy eval is likely to give you that issue of course

Vafiadis: I mean, you’d be able to see if an inordinate amount of time is being spent in whatever function finally evaluates it

Vafiadis: But beyond that it’d be tricky

Figurski: It depends on the view you’re in. you’re basically making the bottom up view less useful

Kalinoski: What does the word “lazy” mean viz. programming

Kalinoski: Sorry I can google this

Brinker: And at that point you’ll probably have to rewrite to be the optimized way anyway

Vafiadis: Right. it’s very use-case-oriented

Struck: Kalinoski: not computing until it’s needed

Vafiadis: Overall, I’d rather get mostly decent perf in exchange for simple, non-mutating code and then optimize where needed

Vafiadis: But in some cases, yeah, the optimized way will be necessary

Lethco: Vafiadis: i can understand that, but it’s kind of like, where are you going to spend the performance? you have 10ms/frame-ish to do as much as you can, and the more you do the better the result. if you optimize one part, that allows you to spend that performance on something else, more particles or whatever

Empasis: So i forgot to git push origin develop and hopped on a diff. computer and ran git checkout -B newbranch from develop. i continue working in newbranch until i git merge back into develop right?

Kalinoski: I love discussion about performance-critical code

Mahnke: You can spend them on convenience, and it’s not bad to do so, but you only really want to do that if you get a lot out of it

Bundley: Also the really complex code tends to not benefit so much from that. i mean writing a convex hull function is moderately tricky, whether or not you use mutations

Ollivier: Opiates: sounds okay to me. there’s a git channel btw

Sherief: Hylle: Your tweets about Quebec made me sad. :/

Baillet: Deltab thanks wasnt aware

Vafiadis: Tcsc_: a lot of it depends on what your definition of “bottleneck” is going to be

Vafiadis: Tcsc_: if you’re doing a bunch of async stuff, or calculations between dom updates or something, it’s going to be pretty negligible. If you’re gonna do frame-sensitive stuff.

Pizzaro: Oh, yeah, this only applies to code that runs per-frame

Vafiadis: Yeah, if I did that more I’d probably do things more your way

Vafiadis: Lazy eval is also a PITA for really time-sensitive stuff like that because it’s hard to know when something has been evaluated

Vafiadis: I’m looking at you, Haskell

Milsaps: Yeah, that sounds tough.

Francom: Hylle: Because I think it’s a bit too easy to find something “silly” without knowing a bit more about its history

Wojtanik: Hylle: If you care a little bit: http://minorityrights.org/minorities/french-canadians/

Zamudio: That should give you a better idea.

Groman: I just find any kind of nationalism silly tbqh

Bhatti: Jtreminio: Perhaps you could trim it on “blur”

Klaman: I mean, I don’t personally see that as a bug. but :/