Pretty dry, very quiet speaker, hard to hear. Could have used more energy or excitement about the topic. The "here's a thing Ardent has that you probably shouldn't actually use" was pointless. If we shouldn't use it, it's of no value showing us. I would There was very little "why", just a lot of "here's what this does".
Interesting topic, but about halfway through I was starting to dream...oh wait, what? I was starting to fall asleep. Flashbacks to undergraduate lecture halls...
Perhaps this talk could be improved by focusing on fewer structures and how they're useful, instead of attempting a catalog of all the useful structures. Practical code examples and a few images, or perhaps a story of how a particular structure was useful to you personally, would've made this more engaging.
The topic is great and useful, especially for those of us without CS degrees. I agree with an earlier commenter that narrowing the focus to fewer structures might be helpful. Work on volume and varying tone. Great information.
A bit slow/dry indeed, but then again the subject matter was data structures. The example code and occasional anecdote were certainly an improvement over a CS lecture. More emphasis on the practical applications (specifically, real-world use cases for structures) would be an improvement, but overall very good talk.
Data structure talks are tough, and not a topic interpreted scripting language devs think about much, so thanks for bringing these fundamentals, and heck, the fact that the SPL is a thing, to the conference.
Agree with others that the Ardent examples aren't useful; mention it's there but an example for each data structure isn't necessary. Use the saved time to show us some of the benchmarks from the benchmark suite you referenced at the beginning, graphs showing speedup are motivators.
I thought there was a ton of information conveyed through this talk. It was quite dry and hard to keep engaged with the pace that information was being thrown out. I think if there were some way to use illustration or story to keep things interesting and maybe to skip one or two sections, I would have remembered more of the topic.
Comments
Comments are closed.
A little dry - but learned a bunch. I have some reading to do to catch up.
Well thought out and insightful discussion that gave lots of details and overview. Thanks!
Pretty dry, very quiet speaker, hard to hear. Could have used more energy or excitement about the topic. The "here's a thing Ardent has that you probably shouldn't actually use" was pointless. If we shouldn't use it, it's of no value showing us. I would There was very little "why", just a lot of "here's what this does".
Interesting topic, but about halfway through I was starting to dream...oh wait, what? I was starting to fall asleep. Flashbacks to undergraduate lecture halls...
Perhaps this talk could be improved by focusing on fewer structures and how they're useful, instead of attempting a catalog of all the useful structures. Practical code examples and a few images, or perhaps a story of how a particular structure was useful to you personally, would've made this more engaging.
The topic is great and useful, especially for those of us without CS degrees. I agree with an earlier commenter that narrowing the focus to fewer structures might be helpful. Work on volume and varying tone. Great information.
A bit slow/dry indeed, but then again the subject matter was data structures. The example code and occasional anecdote were certainly an improvement over a CS lecture. More emphasis on the practical applications (specifically, real-world use cases for structures) would be an improvement, but overall very good talk.
There was a LOT of information, and it was a little hard for me to follow. I did learn some things about arrays that I wasn't aware of.
The information was solid, It was a lot of information packed into a very short time.
Data structure talks are tough, and not a topic interpreted scripting language devs think about much, so thanks for bringing these fundamentals, and heck, the fact that the SPL is a thing, to the conference.
Agree with others that the Ardent examples aren't useful; mention it's there but an example for each data structure isn't necessary. Use the saved time to show us some of the benchmarks from the benchmark suite you referenced at the beginning, graphs showing speedup are motivators.
Got lots of great info from the talk. Maybe adding more illustrations or real-world applications would have made it less dry. But I learned a ton.
Very insightful. Time constrain was a bump for such a interesting subject. I did learn things that I wasn't aware of.
I thought there was a ton of information conveyed through this talk. It was quite dry and hard to keep engaged with the pace that information was being thrown out. I think if there were some way to use illustration or story to keep things interesting and maybe to skip one or two sections, I would have remembered more of the topic.