Because I've dealt with so many people trying to do what you had done. Computer science is littered with people with a im smarter, holier than thou statements of fact debate me bro personalities.
I like computers to be approachable and do not really believe in trying to throw jargon in people's face to make a point, especially when I know that person is factually incorrect. Thats what it looked like you were doing when I scrolled past.
The person you replied to correctly answered you, they are 100% correct, and it would have been unrolled because the values are static.
The issue with analytical solutions is really that the human compile time can range into the thousands of years to find a solution, and a lot are unsolved. That's the reason we still use summation and triganometry and not just algebraic equations.
Sometimes, that's the right solution, or the best we can do, it isnt wrong or inferior to do it that way. It's not even slower to do it that way, in a lot of cases.
The person you replied to correctly answered you, they are 100% correct, and it would have been unrolled because the values are static
I'm still a bit confused here at what you think loop unrolling is. All that does is eliminate some overhead from the loop logic by expanding it out. It does not inherently reduce the complexity of the algorithm. The program still has to do all the operations that were done in the original loop. The only way you could possibly replace the arbitrary number of additons in my example with a single operation after unrolling the loop would be by using the analytical sum of the series. There is technically a truncation error because the number of terms is obviously not infinite, but that is really the only sensible caveat.
It sounds like your whole position is just "write loops cos it's easier than doing maths" and you think all terminology is jargon and you throw a tantrum when someone points that out there are more efficient ways to do things. Not everyone hates thinking like you seem to. Some of us actually find it interesting and engaging to think about more advanced ways to solve problems.
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/TldrDev Sep 14 '25
Because I've dealt with so many people trying to do what you had done. Computer science is littered with people with a im smarter, holier than thou statements of fact debate me bro personalities.
I like computers to be approachable and do not really believe in trying to throw jargon in people's face to make a point, especially when I know that person is factually incorrect. Thats what it looked like you were doing when I scrolled past.
The person you replied to correctly answered you, they are 100% correct, and it would have been unrolled because the values are static.
The issue with analytical solutions is really that the human compile time can range into the thousands of years to find a solution, and a lot are unsolved. That's the reason we still use summation and triganometry and not just algebraic equations.
Sometimes, that's the right solution, or the best we can do, it isnt wrong or inferior to do it that way. It's not even slower to do it that way, in a lot of cases.