“ah sure, I’ll solve it in n log(n) for you with an obscure algorithm because n² is too slow for your 1000 customers, even though there’s no perceived difference for n<10⁷.”
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
at job interview
“ah sure, I’ll solve it in n log(n) for you with an obscure algorithm because n² is too slow for your 1000 customers, even though there’s no perceived difference for n<10⁷.”
O(fuck)
O(unnecessary zoom meeting)
O(n!n!)
It works really well, until n=3, which takes a while. Don’t ask about n=4.
It’s not like anyone cares once you have the job anyway
Usually the most straightforward solution is good enough. And when you want to improve the performance, it’s rarely about time complexity.
Acshually, in the context of O(N^2) N can be seen to constantly be equal to N and thus, as a constant, we can ignore it in our O analysis.
Yes, my bubble sort does run in O(1)
Get out of my office
Bubble sort? This wizard talk shall not pass.
My god, some of us can’t read past select queries and v-lookup ruins.
On a Friday no less.
O(TREE(n))
We will also accept “I’ll file a ticket under the tech debt epic” (which will never get picked up unless/until it causes a prod outage/SLA violation)