Why did you post that implementation and not David Frank's with 1.7 Terrabit/s ?
this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
132 points (99.3% liked)
Programmer Humor
20829 readers
1442 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I saw it before that one, and by that time i already posted. I think deleting and reposting is a little weird so I guess I'll have to make due X)
I'll mention it in the post body though, thanks lol
Didn't realise that it's yours! Kudos :)
I didn't make it, sorry 😅 I found it since i like to browse codegolf (and PCJ, i also saw it before from there) and decided to upload it here because it always makes me crack up. If only i were this dedicated 😂
Sorry 😅
Yeah, I haven't solved puzzles like that in a while either
Can we get a tldr for the approach used?
hand-optimized SIMD-instructions probably
I already have a master's thesis. This was harder.
Lmao
God I miss PCJ 😭
This isn’t even really C, it’s a bunch of assembly instructions jammed into C
Not that it’s not impressive… but still.
Correction: This is not C. It may seem so because of the #include's and #define's but this is just standard gnu assembler syntax. You can notice that the included files are all in asm/ and the macros are just valid assembly.
It's built with GCC instead of as because gcc links the standard library (which include those asm/ files) for you. Though you can build it normally with as, too.
Heavy, iirc. I haven't done this stuff in a while so please correct me if i'm wrong.
Oh dang ok. TIL
I saw gcc and assumed c or c++ but it didn’t look like cop