←back to thread

688 points samwho | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jcalx ◴[] No.45018653[source]
This article and its associated HN comment section continue in the long tradition of Big O Notation explainers [0] and getting into a comment kerfuffle over the finer, technical points of such notation versus its practical usage [1]. The wheel turns...

[0] https://nedbatchelder.com/text/bigo.html

[1] https://nedbatchelder.com/blog/201711/toxic_experts.html

replies(8): >>45018700 #>>45019269 #>>45019323 #>>45019459 #>>45020278 #>>45022682 #>>45024681 #>>45026341 #
0xbadcafebee ◴[] No.45020278[source]
Toxic expert here! I hate when blog posts try to teach complex subjects. It's almost always a non-expert doing the teaching, and they fail to do it accurately. This then causes 1) the entire internet repeating the inaccuracies, and 2) the readers make no attempt to do further learning than the blog post, reinforcing their ignorance.

I'll double down on my toxicity by saying I didn't like the page layout. As someone with ADHD (and a declining memory), I need to be led through formatting/sub-headings/bullets/colored sections/etc into each detail or it all blends together into a wall of text. The longer it takes to make a point (visually and conceptually), the more lost I am. I couldn't easily follow it. The Simple Wikipedia page was more straight to the point (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation), but reading the "full" Wikipedia page thrusts you headlong into a lot of math, which to me signifies that this shit is more complex than it seems and simplifying it is probably a bad idea.

replies(7): >>45020606 #>>45020717 #>>45022407 #>>45023373 #>>45024537 #>>45026531 #>>45032927 #
croes ◴[] No.45022407[source]
Most of the time inaccurate knowledge is better than no knowledge.

I bet you also have subjects where you use and spread inaccuracies unless you are universal expert

replies(1): >>45026764 #
1. sgarland ◴[] No.45026764[source]
This varies wildly with the subject, and the degree of inaccuracy.

If you say, “hash maps are generally O(1), and are a great default choice,” you’re not that wrong (subjectivity aside).

If you say, “storing integers as strings guarantees precision, so you should prefer them over decimal or float types,” you’re technically correct about the first part, but are enormously wrong for a variety of reasons about the conclusion.