|
|
|
|
|
by ThrowawayR2
1114 days ago
|
|
They are. Patterson & Hennessy at their Turing Award lecture back in 2017, when they started talking about where future opportunities for increased speed were going to come from, the very first thing they took a (polite) dump on was how software was written very inefficiently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LVeEjsn8Ts&t=2183s The old canard that programmer time was worth more than processing time that bad coders quote is less and less true by the year; SWEs who are able to wring better performance out of less hardware resources are going to become more valuable in the future. |
|
As much as I'd like for this prediction to come true, I think it's wishful thinking. Compute capacity continues to increase exponentially while (human) cognitive resources, for all practical purposes, do not, which means less efficient code will continue to be the more economically viable option as far as I can tell.
Even with AI, where we're essentially trading compute (used for running code) for extended cognitive resources (used for writing code), what incentive exists to channel those resources into writing faster code rather than writing the same code faster?