"Performance (Really) Matters" with Emery Berger

I think you're better off watching any of the various recordings "Performance Matters" conference talks[0] by Emery Berger to learn about all the ways that developers are benchmarking the wrong thing using the wrong techniques, and what you could do instead [0] ▶ this video

If you enjoy the science of injecting slowness to determine which component has the largest impact on performance, you would enjoy this work by Emery Berger. Coz: Finding Code that Counts with Causal Profiling link "Performance (Really) Matters" with Emery Berger ▶ this video

If you're measuring performance and haven't seen this talk by Emery Berger, I highly recommend it. It's mind blowing, but also terrifying when you realize how many mistakes you've been making up until this point. ▶ this video

Performance (Really) Matters by Emery Berger talks a lot about layout. ▶ this video And the topic of Coordinated Omission, "How NOT to Measure Latency" by Gil Tene link Injection slowness into an application to measure the relative impact of that portion of the application has really worked well for me.

> The main trap is trying to benchmark and profile it without the context of the whole application. Emery Berger's "Performance (Really) Matters" talk also goes into this[0]. He paints a really, really depressing picture of how unreliable benchmarks truly are. Like, things like link order having ridiculous impacts and stuff like that. [0] ▶ this video

It isn't CS 101. You are being overly dismissive and even CS people from top schools get this stuff wrong. The courses that introduce big-O are often the weeder courses, they don't aim to education, they aim to flunk out the people that might be hard to teach so that CS departments can gate keep. When you have top CS researchers having to give talks to remind people that layout matters more than instruction selection, the CS as a whole has focused on the wrong things. ▶ this video Figure how to build people up, not tear them down.

I know, and that is exactly my point. It isn't like "send to REPL" in pretty much any half-decent LISP. And it hurts development comfort, speed and maintenance is way more burdensome than what it could be. Here, you would need to involve a compiler of course and do more due diligence and then run ftrace or something to exchange the code. Also, you would probably in some cases need to make sure, the ordering of code is right as to not hurt performance. (See Emery Berger's talk ▶ this video which probably applies here as well.) Of course, with great power comes great responsibility. You could add some optional checking facility, that would be able to roll back the changes to code if some conditions were met.