• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility?


  • Subject: Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility?
  • From: Fritz Anderson <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:54:22 -0500

On 2 Sep 2013, at 12:47 AM, Marcel Weiher <email@hidden> wrote:

> This gets (mis-)quoted out of context way too much (my emphasis):
>
> 	"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil”
>
> It goes on as follows:
>
> "Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%. A good programmer will not be lulled into complacency by such reasoning, he will be wise to look carefully at the critical code; but only ***after*** that code has been identified. It is often a mistake to make  ***a priori*** judgments about what parts of a program are really critical, since the universal experience of programmers who have been using measurement tools has been that their intuitive guesses fail.
...

[Emphases added. I hope the edits do not misrepresent your position.]

This is wisdom. But the aphorism is not in even rhetorical opposition to — it is a reinforcement of — what Knuth restated at length. The key word is _premature_, doing what should be done **after**, not to be done **a priori**.

The opposition ("Yet..."), if any, is against taking the aphorism as an absolute, ignoring that it warns of prematurity, not optimization or instrumentation.  Everybody who quotes it understands that, and joins Knuth in demanding measurement before jumping to conclusions — which are almost always wrong. And premature.

I confess I am sheepish about applying Talmudic exegesis to what are after all only the opinions of one man, however distinguished. The appropriate issue is not what his opinions are (were? I hope not), but what is the best practice.

	— F


_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • (Pre)mature optimization and small efficiencies
      • From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility? (From: Graham Cox <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility? (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility? (From: Uli Kusterer <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility? (From: Marcel Weiher <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Threadsafe copy of objective c object
  • Next by Date: Re: Core Data Initialization
  • Previous by thread: Re: Experience with keyed archiving forward/backwards compatibility?
  • Next by thread: (Pre)mature optimization and small efficiencies
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread