<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>NotRocketSurgery: Moore's Law in Reverse</title>
    <link>http://notrocketsurgery.com/articles/2006/08/31/moores-law-in-reverse</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>Relax.</description>
    <item>
      <title>Moore's Law in Reverse</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;If the performance of &lt;em&gt;hardware&lt;/em&gt; doubles every so many months, why doesn&amp;#8217;t the amount of time we spend worrying about the performance of our &lt;em&gt;software&lt;/em&gt; get cut in half?&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Sure, one might riposte by saying that we&amp;#8217;re doing more sophisticated things with our software now than we were that many months ago, so we need to use the processor speed to do more fancy stuff.  But I don&amp;#8217;t buy it.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Unless you&amp;#8217;re writing something with massive data-crunching or vast levels of concurrency and you use, say, C++ or Java to do it, then admit it to yourself:  your life is being sacrificed at the altar of Premature Optimization.  It&amp;#8217;s not just bits of your code; it&amp;#8217;s your whole paradigm.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Your blog, your desktop word processor, your personals website, your client&amp;#8217;s shopping cart:  let&amp;#8217;s face it; they aren&amp;#8217;t the &lt;span class="caps"&gt;SETI&lt;/span&gt; project.  Why are so many programmers who write this stuff being a slave to memory management, static typing, ugly syntax, and all that misery?&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;If getting more &amp;#8220;low level&amp;#8221; is always better, then we ought to be writing everything out in machine code ourselves, and our punch-card poking predecessors were the most productive programmers in human history.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#8217;s be honest.  If your app is running slowly, in 80% of cases, you can throw on another server, or pop in some memory.  Those things are cheap.  Your happiness, sanity, and productivity aren&amp;#8217;t.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;All that hard work being done by the diligent folks over at Intel and &lt;span class="caps"&gt;AMD&lt;/span&gt; should buy us something, after all.  Why not a little happiness and productivity?&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Eight months ago I stopped writing software to be read computers and started writing it to be read by people (myself in particular.)&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#8217;s figure out how we can make this &lt;a href="http://developer.kde.org/language-bindings/ruby/index.html"&gt;possible&lt;/a&gt; in all &lt;a href="http://www.rubycocoa.com/"&gt;domains&lt;/a&gt; of programming, not just &lt;a href="http://www.rubyonrails.org"&gt;web applications&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;What&amp;#8217;s the point of all those megaflops if they can&amp;#8217;t make our lives better?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:04:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:51a22329-9559-4a7e-9c94-064dd8da06e7</guid>
      <author>ryan</author>
      <link>http://notrocketsurgery.com/articles/2006/08/31/moores-law-in-reverse</link>
      <category>mooreslaw</category>
      <category>processors</category>
      <category>happiness</category>
      <category>productivity</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Moore's Law in Reverse" by Bruno</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You make very much sense and I agree 100%. Everybody is so concerned with using the fastest language, to create the most efficient piece of software ever written.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Common, be serious. You might as well just write assembly.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:39:43 -0400</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:3126f5a6-eecd-4b00-b4fa-7dc05a66d58d</guid>
      <link>http://notrocketsurgery.com/articles/2006/08/31/moores-law-in-reverse#comment-53</link>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
