744
Not my problem sort (infosec.pub)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 150 points 6 days ago

Reminds me of quantum-bogosort: randomize the list; check if it is sorted. If it is, you're done; otherwise, destroy this universe.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 95 points 6 days ago

Guaranteed to sort the list in nearly instantaneous time and with absolutely no downsides that are capable of objecting.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 48 points 6 days ago

You still have to check that it's sorted, which is O(n).

We'll also assume that destroying the universe takes constant time.

[-] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 43 points 6 days ago

In the universe where the list is sorted, it doesn't actually matter how long the destruction takes!

[-] groet@feddit.org 13 points 6 days ago

It actually takes a few trillion years but its fine because we just stop considering the "failed" universes because they will be gone soon™ anyway.

[-] MBM@lemmings.world 8 points 6 days ago

Eh, trillion is a constant

[-] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 8 points 6 days ago

amortized O(0)

[-] Benjaben@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

We'll also assume that destroying the universe takes constant time.

Well yeah just delete the pointer to it!

[-] PoolloverNathan@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago

universe.take()

[-] vithigar@lemmy.ca 16 points 6 days ago

Except you missed a bug in the "check if it's sorted" code and it ends up destroying every universe.

[-] db2@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

There's a bug in it now, that's why we're still here.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 days ago

You still have to check that it's sorted, which is O(n).

We'll also assume that destroying the universe takes constant time.

[-] Zaphod@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 6 days ago

The creation and destruction of universes is left as an exercise to the reader

[-] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 4 points 6 days ago

Creation is easy, assuming the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics!

[-] random72guy@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago

Instead of destroying the universe, can we destroy prior, failed shuffle/check iterations to retain o(1)? Then we wouldn't have to reload all of creation into RAM.

[-] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 6 points 6 days ago

Delete prior iterations of the loop in the same timeline? I'm not sure there's anything in quantum mechanics to permit that...

[-] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 13 points 6 days ago

What library are you using for that?

[-] jcg@halubilo.social 29 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

is-sorted and a handful of about 300 other npm packages. Cloning the repo and installing takes about 16 hours but after that you're pretty much good for the rest of eternity

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 6 days ago

that explains why it took god 7 days to make the universe

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

We still suffer from the runtime errors that could've been caught at compilation time.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 6 days ago

In Python you just use

import destroy_universe
[-] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 6 days ago

Since randomizing the list increases entropy, it could theoretically make your cpu cooler just before it destroys the universe.

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
744 points (98.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

19551 readers
1024 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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS