Nobody shares knowledge better than this
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Then a quick restart.
That's.......
A solution.Not a good solution.
But it's definitely a solution. To that... problem?
-
@Yamikuronue said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Whose computer is it anyway.
TIL if I run SSDS, Spectate takes ownership of my PC. I knew I should have read the terms and conditions!
When I'm watching my videos etc What else should be running. NOTHING. I don't have to worry about those apps when they won't have a chance.
-
@The_Quiet_One said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Citation, please.
Eh, makes sense to me. I'd be willing to bet most people have coded "noodle code". Until they figured out it was a terrible idea and started doing it properly.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
When I'm watching my videos etc What else should be running.
I typically run my email client, an IM client, IRC, and Slack, so people can find me if they want to interrupt my video session.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
pretty much. Spaghetti code spawns serendipity not so with structured code. I can jam my code through trial and error and get results. Structured is not so flexible
Aside from the fact that this isn't true - 'serendipity' (i.e., unexpected behavior) is all over the place in code regardless of structure - this is like arguing in favor of selecting something to buy by putting the names of everything in a store into a hat and buying the first item that you draw out of it. Good luck getting the food you need instead of, say, some tampons.
90% of the greatest programmers coded noodle code.
I can't even begin to imagine where you got that idea. Unless your definition of 'greatest coders' is "me, Mel Kaye, Peter Samson, Steve Wozniak, and John Harris", in which case I suppose you could have claimed 100%.
Don Knuth, Dennis Ritchie, Ken Thompson, Doug McIlroy, Tony Hoare, Paul Allen, Bill Gosper, Slug Russell, Ken Williams, Richard Stallman are/were all (arguably) 'great programmers' known for their careful coding habits. Even in assembly language, which takes some doing. They may have used
goto
at times, but they did not write spaghetti code.I'm against anything done in the name of efficiency... unless it makes the code easier to understand.
Yes, but no one in the world except you thinks that spaghetti code is easier to read (or even to write) than structured code - the general belief is that unrestricted use of unconditional transfers makes it much harder to read and understand, because it turns the code design from a hierarchy to a network while simultaneously making it impossible to read a section of the code in isolation.
FFS, even if you hate nested statements and local variables, you can at least use full functions for things that get used repeatedly, rather than having no clear start or end points for the subroutines. One of the worst parts I found in trying to read your code was that every time I thought I had found the end of a subroutine, I found that either there were two or more subroutines overlapping each other with no comments to point out the overlap, or else there was some jump out of it that made the subroutine three times longer than I thought it was.
-
@sloosecannon said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
on a modern OS
Well, there's your problem. Just run SSDS on a 1990 version of DOS, and it'll run like Usain Bolt if you cut off both of his legs and arms and paralyzed him from the neck down. Yep, just that fast.
-
@sloosecannon That is a good point. Although that's kind of like saying "some of the best runners crawled on their hands and knees" referring to them as infants.
-
@The_Quiet_One said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
What, they are communists?
Why do you thing they are called "com-mie-puters"? Duuuh!
-
FFS, even if you hate nested statements and local variables, you can at least use full functions for things that get used repeatedly, rather than having no clear start or end points for the subroutines. One of the worst parts I found in trying to read your code was that every time I thought I had found the end of a subroutine, I found that either there were two or more subroutines overlapping each other with no comments to point out the overlap, or else there was some jump out of it that made the subroutine three times longer than I thought it was.
Nested statements look like an eagle flying across the page and aren't that readable.
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
So you are somewhat handicapped.
Someone is, yes, but I'm not sure it's who you think it is.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@sloosecannon said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
on a modern OS
Well, there's your problem. Just run SSDS on a 1990 version of DOS, and it'll run like Usain Bolt if you cut off both of his legs and arms and paralyzed him from the neck down. Yep, just that fast.
If current O/S doesn't allow for control over my computer then maybe I'd get a copy of DOS
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
Done it before, in AppleSoft BASIC, in x86 assembler, and in MIPS assembler. Guess what? It sucked. I found myself going back and pulling everything apart, restructuring it, adding huge piles of comments, and just throwing away any parts that I could no longer understand, and when I did similar projects with more careful planning, the design and coding went much, much faster. The code usually performed better, too, though you keep saying that efficiency doesn't matter when writing a super-fast string search.
You still haven't told us what algorithm you used, which, combined with what you are saying now, seems to confirm my 'algorithm, what algorithm?' guess. You don't even know how it works, or how fast it actually runs, do you? Have you ever once used a profiler to see how it actually performs? If not, then any claims that it is performant are a lot of smug hot air from someone who doesn't know what he's saying.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Maciejasjmj said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
SSDS can play the first 10 seconds or so of every video I have FAST FORWARD.
public partial class Form1 : Form { private MediaElement me; private List<string> files; private int fileIndex = 0; private void MoveToNextFile() { if (fileIndex >= files.Count) { Application.Exit(); return; } me.Stop(); me.Source = new Uri(files[fileIndex]); me.Play(); me.SpeedRatio = 2; fileIndex++; } public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); var host = new ElementHost() { Dock = DockStyle.Fill, Visible = true }; me = new MediaElement() { LoadedBehavior = MediaState.Manual, UnloadedBehavior = MediaState.Manual }; host.Child = me; Controls.Add(host); files = Directory.EnumerateFiles(@"C:\your\video\folder").ToList(); } private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { timer1.Interval = 1; timer1.Enabled = true; } private void timer1_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e) { timer1.Interval = 5000; MoveToNextFile(); } }
Whoa. That took like... 10 minutes. Truly a stunning feature requiring lots of work.
And I'm pretty sure the code can be shortened and organized further, but your 10 minute consultancy is up, Swampy.
Good start. But can it do RANDOMLY. Or by gendre etc.
Your videos have genders?
Boy...have we got the thread for you...
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Nested statements look like an eagle flying across the page and aren't that readable.
I'd rather look at an eagle in flight than a bowl of moldy spaghetti. The eagle goes a lot faster, too.
-
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
Done it before, in AppleSoft BASIC, in x86 assembler, and in MIPS assembler. Guess what? It sucked. I found myself going back and pulling everything apart, restructuring it, adding huge piles of comments, and just throwing away any parts that I could no longer understand, and when I did similar projects with more careful planning, the design and coding went much, much faster. The code usually performed better, too, though you keep saying that efficiency doesn't matter when writing a super-fast string search.
You still haven't told us what algorithm you used, which, combined with what you are saying now, seems to confirm my 'algorithm, what algorithm?' guess. You don't even know how it works, or how fast it actually runs, do you? Have you ever once used a profiler to see how it actually performs? If not, then any claims that it is performant are a lot of smug hot air from someone who doesn't know what he's saying.
The search outperforms Bling Google and a couple others I've tried. They have very low limits on the size of files they will search. I used my app to string together some huge files with a long numeric string to search for at the end. Yup SSDS won hands down.
Careful planning can be a waste of time...
On one project I was done in a week instead of 6 months...
By displaying the cost of each system query the users found that by adding 1 more piece of info cut the access time by 90%. No system upgrade required and the results were immediate.
You can't stop stubborn.. Planning and design bedamned.
-
@HardwareGeek What if the eagle is carrying the bowl of moldy spaghetti, and we're watching it through a random-random slo-mo screen reshoot through SSDS?
-
@Polygeekery said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Your videos have genders?
Well, you can transcode them...
Damn it, now you got me doing it too!
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
Done it before, in AppleSoft BASIC, in x86 assembler, and in MIPS assembler. Guess what? It sucked. I found myself going back and pulling everything apart, restructuring it, adding huge piles of comments, and just throwing away any parts that I could no longer understand, and when I did similar projects with more careful planning, the design and coding went much, much faster. The code usually performed better, too, though you keep saying that efficiency doesn't matter when writing a super-fast string search.
You still haven't told us what algorithm you used, which, combined with what you are saying now, seems to confirm my 'algorithm, what algorithm?' guess. You don't even know how it works, or how fast it actually runs, do you? Have you ever once used a profiler to see how it actually performs? If not, then any claims that it is performant are a lot of smug hot air from someone who doesn't know what he's saying.
The search outperforms Bling Google and a couple others I've tried.
I'm not sure where to even begin with this. You are comparing the time of a search performed on a single file (your manually created not-an-index) running on a local system to remote systems that are searching through billions of documents on millions of HTTP servers. You could be reading through the local file with a random walk and still might get the local results in less time than it takes for the network to transmit the remote request, so, good on you?
Compare apples and oranges, FFS. Compare it to grep or something similar operating on that same no-an-index file, with a profiler timing them, and then we can talk.
They have very low limits on the size of files they will search.
WTF is this supposed to even mean?
I used my app to string together some huge files with a long numeric string to search for at the end. Yup SSDS won hands down.
No, you compared apples and oranges, and without actually timing it with a profiler you didn't actually compare them, so, no.
Careful planning can be a waste of time...
So it's OK for a toddler to build a skyscraper with an Erector set? Good to know.
On one project I was done in a week instead of 6 months...
Huh? What are you talking about now? What kind of project?
By displaying the cost of each system query the users found that by adding 1 more piece of info cut the access time by 90%. No system upgrade required and the results were immediate.
NFC what you are talking about.
-
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
Done it before, in AppleSoft BASIC, in x86 assembler, and in MIPS assembler. Guess what? It sucked. I found myself going back and pulling everything apart, restructuring it, adding huge piles of comments, and just throwing away any parts that I could no longer understand, and when I did similar projects with more careful planning, the design and coding went much, much faster. The code usually performed better, too, though you keep saying that efficiency doesn't matter when writing a super-fast string search.
You still haven't told us what algorithm you used, which, combined with what you are saying now, seems to confirm my 'algorithm, what algorithm?' guess. You don't even know how it works, or how fast it actually runs, do you? Have you ever once used a profiler to see how it actually performs? If not, then any claims that it is performant are a lot of smug hot air from someone who doesn't know what he's saying.
The search outperforms Bling Google and a couple others I've tried.
I'm not sure where to even begin with this. You are comparing the time of a search performed on a single file (your manually created not-an-index) running on a local system to remote systems that are searching through billions of documents on millions of HTTP servers. You could be reading through the local file with a random walk and still might get the local results in less time than it takes for the network to transmit the remote request, so, good on you?
Compare apples and oranges, FFS. Compare it to grep or something similar operating on that same no-an-index file, with a profiler timing them, and then we can talk.
They have very low limits on the size of files they will search.
WTF is this supposed to even mean?
I used my app to string together some huge files with a long numeric string to search for at the end. Yup SSDS won hands down.
No, you compared apples and oranges, and didn't actually time them, so, no.
Careful planning can be a waste of time...
On one project I was done in a week instead of 6 months...
By displaying the cost of each system query the users found that by adding 1 more piece of info cut the access time by 90%. No system upgrade required and the results were immediate.
You can't stop stubborn.. Planning and design bedamned.I was using the search they supply for personal use. I'd start the indexers then search for those strings at the end and Nothing.
Timing is about the same. Minor inefficiencies didn't matter an iota. Or part there of.
-
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
remote systems that are searching through billions of documents on millions of HTTP servers.
He's talking about Google Desktop Search and its ilk.
Yes, this thread is that old.
-
@Onyx said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
remote systems that are searching through billions of documents on millions of HTTP servers.
He's talking about Google Desktop Search and its ilk.
Yes, this thread is that old.
I don't care about searching data that isn't mine except when searching the net..
I'm sure a net version would do just fine.
-
@SpectateSwamp Have you compared it to any desktop search engines that didn't get discontinued because of how badly they sucked? 'Cos Google Desktop Search was notoriously bad, and the contemporary Windows Desktop Search was even worse.
More to the point, your 'solution' requires you to create this massive index file manually before using it. That's not an index-free search, that's making the user do the computer's job, which is the reverse of how things are usually intended to go. Even using
cat `find /` | grep 'my search string'
shares knowledge better than that.
-
-
@Weng ?
-
@ScholRLEA Maybe he'd like
baloo
(indexing engine used in conjunction with KDE by default). First time I started the indexer my HDD almost escaped the case due to furious spinning, and it also somehow managed to lock down ALL THE CORES on my i5.I mean, that's basically what swampy regards as good behavior, no?
-
@Yamikuronue I prefer a white with my popcorn.
-
@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp Have you compared it to any desktop search engines that didn't get discontinued because of how badly they sucked? 'Cos Google Desktop Search was notoriously bad, and the contemporary Windows Desktop Search was even worse.
More to the point, your 'solution' requires you to create this massive index file manually before using it. That's not an index-free search, that's making the user do the computer's job, which is the reverse of how things are usually intended to go. Even using
cat `find /` | grep 'my search string'
shares knowledge better than that.
So, I decided to try something.He complained that none of the desktop search programs searched the whole file.
I made a .txt file, 9k of "This is a test", followed by "Can this beat Spectate's search? Well can it?".
I tried to search, using the built-in Windows Start Menu search, immediately after saving the file.
It found the .txt file in a matter of seconds.
@SpectateSwamp: Prove to me that you can beat this. This is basic functionality built in to Windows. Prove that your search is in any way capable of even remotely comparing to this, and I may consider installing it. On a VM. Maybe. If I'm feeling generous.
-
Guyyyys. We covered this back when WinXP was young. He was wrong then, and is still (even more) wrong today.
Get him to give you the source. Enjoy.
-
@Weng said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Guyyyys. We covered this back when WinXP was young. He was wrong then, and is still (even more) wrong today.
Get him to give you the source. Enjoy.
Oh I know.
I just enjoy crushing the last remaining shred of hope he has that his worthless program is worth even the very keystrokes he expends trying to proclaim its greatness.
-
@Weng said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Guyyyys. We covered this back when WinXP was young. He was wrong then, and is still (even more) wrong today.
Get him to give you the source. Enjoy.
And still relevant today. More and more knowledge shared everyday. I try not to repeat myself but with old age it may happen now and again now and again.
-
@sloosecannon said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Weng said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Guyyyys. We covered this back when WinXP was young. He was wrong then, and is still (even more) wrong today.
Get him to give you the source. Enjoy.
Oh I know.
I just enjoy crushing the last remaining shred of hope he has that his worthless program is worth even the very keystrokes he expends trying to proclaim its greatness.
It's not working.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@sloosecannon said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Weng said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Guyyyys. We covered this back when WinXP was young. He was wrong then, and is still (even more) wrong today.
Get him to give you the source. Enjoy.
Oh I know.
I just enjoy crushing the last remaining shred of hope he has that his worthless program is worth even the very keystrokes he expends trying to proclaim its greatness.
It's not working.
You're not trying hard enough then.
-
@sloosecannon !!!
Public service announcement, if is not working it may be advisable to try smarter instead of trying harder
-
@The_Quiet_One said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
which square peg your noodle can jam into,
Engine visualizes this quite strangely....
-
@Weng said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Yamikuronue I prefer a white with my popcorn.
work too
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
This bird may be stalking me. I will be able to tell if it is the same Bird.
Yes, we sent it to keep an eye on you. Please don't shoot it. The training cost a fortune.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
SSDS is poised to make good use of quantum computing.
Have you considered ditching old binary techniques and using quadnary?
-
@Yamikuronue said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
I don't have other places with the same line of code either... because I cleaned it all up into one reusable method instead of copy-and-pasting.
Hey, it's just like SSDS! All code cleaned up into one method.
Form_Initialize()
.@ScholRLEA said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Have you compared it to any desktop search engines that didn't get discontinued because of how badly they sucked?
See? Other engines come and go, but SSDS persists. Truly a marvelous piece of code!
-
@boomzilla said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
SSDS is poised to make good use of quantum computing.
Have you considered ditching old binary techniques and using quadnary?
That's easy, all he needs to do is put it on Toshiba's new QLC SSD and it's automatically quadnary. Also, I think there's an RTOS called Quantum. I wonder if it has a VB5 compiler?
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Good start. But can it do RANDOMLY.
public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); var host = new ElementHost() { Dock = DockStyle.Fill, Visible = true }; me = new MediaElement() { LoadedBehavior = MediaState.Manual, UnloadedBehavior = MediaState.Manual }; host.Child = me; Controls.Add(host); var rnd = new Random(); files = Directory.EnumerateFiles(@"C:\your\video\folder").OrderBy(x => rnd.Next()).ToList(); }
Yes.
Or use Fischer-Yates, but I don't want to break Swampy too much.
-
@Maciejasjmj Huh, that's a very interesting way of randomizing a collection.
-
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
To be fair you'd need a copy of VB5 to jam it like I do. So you are somewhat handicapped.
Hmm...maybe now I understand those deaf people who feel like it's an act of violence against their persons to give them a sense of hearing.
-
@mott555 said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@boomzilla said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
SSDS is poised to make good use of quantum computing.
Have you considered ditching old binary techniques and using quadnary?
That's easy, all he needs to do is put it on Toshiba's new QLC SSD and it's automatically quadnary. Also, I think there's an RTOS called Quantum. I wonder if it has a VB5 compiler?
Wouldn't that be hexadecinary (4 bits = 16 states per cell)?
-
@PleegWat That's just what the Perfect Perfects want you to think. Come out to the ol' SwampShack for the new quadntum computing SSDS on SSD's showdown!
Filed Under: brb need to line the walls of my garage with 100 TB SSDs
-
@Polygeekery said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Your videos have genders?
I don't know about genders, but apparently they are male. He said gendre, which is French (Swampy's Canadian, eh) for "son." It's scary to think that his videos might be reproducing, though.
-
@mott555 said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@boomzilla said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@SpectateSwamp said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
SSDS is poised to make good use of quantum computing.
Have you considered ditching old binary techniques and using quadnary?
That's easy, all he needs to do is put it on Toshiba's new QLC SSD and it's automatically quadnary. Also, I think there's an RTOS called Quantum. I wonder if it has a VB5 compiler?
-
@HardwareGeek said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Polygeekery said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Your videos have genders?
I don't know about genders, but apparently they are male. He said gendre, which is French (Swampy's Canadian, eh) for "son." It's scary to think that his videos might be reproducing, though.
Well if they don't, they decay and get corrupted over time, so.... Gotta keep that line alive somehow!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Gotta keep that line alive somehow!
Um, not really.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Nobody shares knowledge better than this:
Gotta keep that line alive somehow!
Um, not really.
But... but... Knowledge might be lost!
-
@SpectateSwamp how much media do you keep? The most I've had has been gigabytes of RAW images, but I rarely looked at them because it was more for archival use.