You must log in or register to comment.
Silly commenter.
L1 cache shouldn’t be large. Increasing the size of the L1 cache increases the latency. Maybe if you shrink the size of the cloths you wear you can squeeze more into the chair, but the ideal L1 cache has to minimize it’s distance from processing. Oversizing adds latency.
Your L2 cache is where you generally try and shove a much bigger cache into it, but it’s still got a size constraint for the latency you are after. Further, typically L1 and L2 only serve 1 CPU. To multi-process stuff you’ll typically need an even larger L3 cache which is shared among cores.
So the cloths on your chair should be minimal for fast access (L1). You can put more cloths on your bed and dressers or in laundry baskets that can be promoted to the chair if you start needing them more often (L2). You can throw a bunch of cloths into a pile in the corner which sit there for a few years and serve many occasions (L3).
The worst thing is going back to main memory (your closet) to search for specialty cloths you are ultimately going to need to send back to the closet. And heavy help you if you have to swap (do laundry).
While I miss my parents after having moved out, I do appreciate my array of clothes being nonvolatile memory. It’s become a comfort, knowing that it stays in the same configuration unless I actively recompile it.
You’re saying this as if there isn’t multiple piles mixed fresh and dirty clothes with an O(n^2) complexity to find something you want.
I personally prefer to have my clothes indexed in an ordered storage so I know exactly which row in the drawers clean shirts are in.
That makes me think of how much it annoys me when things are really messy and disorganized in our house, which is very often.
It’s like there’s no indexing. Where is thing X that somebody else used last? Time to start a fresh empty-cache brute force search of the whole space!
Wouldn’t a pile of clothes have O(n) complexity? They’d still have to go through them one at a time unless the clothes have a really distinct color/shape and are in a somewhat tidy pile s.t. they can be pulled from anywhere.
Not if the pile has a maximum capacity. At that point it’s bounded as a fixed constant.
Items are in a hash table using color/material type/shape as the hashing method optimized for human pattern recognition providing O(1) access. The table is smaller than the number of items causing some collisions. Those items are in a randomly sorted vector. Average case is still around O(1) with an O(n) worst case.
A well organized drawer or cabinet should still be O(1). It takes at least 2 more steps, assuming you don’t leave them open all the time, but the number of operations doesn’t change depending on the number of clothing items you need to retrieve.
A pile of clothes is faster, but only for a small number of items. As the number of articles pile up, they hide older items and need to be pushed side before the intended article can be found and then retrieved. This is now O(N), and less efficient than just storing things in the proper place…
Idk about your pile, but mine is precariously balanced on top of a chair so it’s O(1) until a literal tipping point when everything falls and then it’s O(k*n) where k is the time it takes me to put away a piece of clothing in the closet/laundry (or start a new pile elsewhere).
Unironically this. In a related note, most people confuse “tidy”, which is about aesthetics, with “organised” that is about efficiency. That’s why my long term storage is extremely tidy, and my short term storage (mostly my desk, and a small table next to it) looks like a modern art installation.
Ah, so my problem is actually that I just fail to put things into long-term storage.
Moms are binary. There are only clean and dirty clothes. Kids are ternary: clean, usable and dirty.
Once my son hit 14 …. It just became “his laundry” instead of clean or dirty.
come again?
Yes.
Because it’s covered in come, again.
Jizzuz!
I like the joke, but my pile of clothes is entirely about things that I want to reuse. They’re too dirty to hang back up in the wardrobe, but too clean to throw in the dirty clothes basket. I’m sure there’s an analogy someone could make for this, but Async’s analogy doesn’t work in my case.
They’re too dirty to hang back up in the wardrobe
Why? Can they smear other clothes?
Castle-Nathan-Fillion.gif
Which one? There are so many good Fillion GIFs!
As I suspected, but thanks for the confirmation!
If I wear a shirt for like 30 min and it’s not really dirty yet, I’ll hang it on the for right facing left. All of the clean clothes face right so I know at a glance. When I wear it again it’s dirty no matter what.
Isn’t RAM for stuff you’re kinda using or keeping open to use in the future? Otherwise you’d put it away/save it to a disk.
l1 cache is a cache for ram and ram is a cache for hdd/ssd
Except that my L1 cache is more like a top layer, which doesn’t hold very well in place because of analogic world being so crumbly.
Real HP:MOR energy right there
80/20 rule redux
