• mmddmm@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      25 days ago

      And compiler. And hardware architecture. And optimization flags.

      As usual, it’s some developer that knows little enough to think the walls they see around enclose the entire world.

  • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    Could a kind soul ELI5 this? Well, maybe ELI8. I did quite a bit of programming in the 90-00s as part of my job, although nowadays I’m more of a script kiddie.

    • superheitmann@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      A Boolean is a true/false value. It can only be those two values and there be represented by a single bit (1 or 0).

      In most languages a Boolean variable occupies the space of a full byte (8 bit) even though only a single of those bits is needed for representing the Boolean.

      That’s mostly because computers can’t load a bit. They can only load bytes. Your memory is a single space where each byte has a numeric address. Starting from 0 and going to whatever amount of memory you have available. This is not really true because on most operating systems each process gets a virtual memory space but its true for many microcontrollers. You can load and address each f these bytes but it will always be a byte. That’s why booleans are stored as bytes because youd have to pack them with other data on the same address other wise and that’s getting complicated.

      Talking about getting complicated, in C++ a std::vector<bool> is specialized as a bit field. Each of the values in that vector only occupy a single bit and you can get a vector of size 8 in a single byte. This becomes problematic when you want to store references or pointers to one of the elements or when you’re working with them in a loop because the elements are not of type bool but some bool-reference type.

      • Aux@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        And performance optimisation of a compiler for a 64 bit CPU will realign everything and each boolean will occupy 8 bytes instead.

  • mavu@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    This reminds me that I actually once made a class to store bools packed in uint8 array to save bytes.

    Had forgotten that. I think i have to update the list of top 10 dumbest things i ever did.

    • gamer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      Consider what the disassembly would look like. There’s no fast way to do it.

      It’s also unnecessary since 8 bytes is a negligible amount in most cases. Serialization is the only real scenario where it matters. (Edit: and embedded)

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        In embedded, if you are to the point that you need to optimize the bools to reduce the footprint, you fucked up sizing your mcu.

    • excral@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      In terms of memory usage it’s a waste. But in terms of performance you’re absolutely correct. It’s generally far more efficient to check is a word is 0 than to check if a single bit is zero.

    • bastion@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      The alignment of the language and the alignment of the coder must be similar on at least one metric, or the coder suffers a penalty to develop for each degree of difference from the language’s alignment. This is penalty stacks for each phase of the project.

      So, let’s say that the developer is a lawful good Rust zealot Paladin, but she’s developing in Python, a language she’s moderately familiar with. Since Python is neutral/good, she suffers a -1 penalty for the first phase, -2 for the second, -3 for the third, etc. This is because Rust (the Paladin’s native language) is lawful, and Python is neutral (one degree of difference from lawful), so she operates at a slight disadvantage. However, they are both “good”, so there’s no further penalty.

      The same penalty would occur if using C, which is lawful neutral - but the axis of order and chaos matches, and there is one degree of difference on the axis of good and evil.

      However, if that same developer were to code in Javascript (chaotic neutral), it would be at a -3 (-6, -9…) disadvantage, due to 2 and 1 degree of difference in alignment, respectively.

      Malbolge (chaotic evil), however, would be a -4 (-8, -12) plus an inherent -2 for poor toolchain availability.

      …hope this helps. have fun out there!

      • squaresinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        If JS is chaotic neutral, what then is chaotic evil?

        All I’m saying is

        "10" + 1 => "101"
        "10" - 1 => 9
        "a" - "b" => NaN
        
        • bastion@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          fair enough. My personal opinion might be that it’s evil, but perhaps that’s because I expected some kind of order.