Remix.run Logo
Remix clone Hacker News
new | show | ask | jobsGithub
▲ logicchains 3 hours ago

Your handwritten one has a major performance bug:

    found := false
    for _, v := range s {
        if v == needle {
            found = true
            break
        }
    }
Do you see it? It copies the v into a local variable, which could be tremendously wasteful if it's a large struct. You should instead be taking a pointer to s[i] and comparing the value there with `needle`.

If you'd used `slices.Contains(s, needle)`, on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.

▲kajman an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> If you'd used `slices.Contains(s, needle)`, on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.

Perhaps you're much better at programming than I am, but I prefer these semantics in a language because I figure they're much more likely to have been optimized empirically, support vectorization, and be less buggy than another rote loop I'm trying to speed through.

▲boredatoms an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

or contains() could be written by those who can write performant code, ..once

▲mathisfun123 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.

wut...? the debate isn't between closed (incompetent) source and open (competent) source - the debate is between verbose language and expressive language.