Видео

When the inspiration strikes me or I feel I have something of value to share. I don't make videos to any sort of schedule. Thank you though.

Thanks. Definitely some crew assignments and priorities would go a long way if nothing else. On the other hand I found one of the really interesting things about large magazine chainguns is that the speed of the reload is actually not as much of a concern as for other weapons. With a large magazine you can load it. Get into a fight and even with a skeleton crew/inefficient layout have a pretty decent duration of fire until the magazines are dry. Either you win the fight or back off to repair/reload. Some minimally crewed chain gun based support ships is something I had some interest experimenting with, but didn’t really have the time.

I didn't even know we had shorts 12 years ago

Yeah,, Ions are the ultimate scaling weapon, as a large Ion core can be built deep in the ship and can fire for full DPS with 100% uptime. Railguns don't have any firing arc to worry about occluding, and only need to be pointed at the enemy ship briefly.

@@zanthrasw The best classic ship is a diagonal ship with a deep-set ion core. But it is nothing compared to a spinning disk with rails. It's a little sad about this.

I can't tell if you found the video amusing, or me amusing, but I am glad I could entertain!

Folly loaded chainguns can put out a great deal of damage without having to reload, in fact incapable of being reloaded until they stop firing. This makes it less critical to have a fast reload. If you keep the 2 space gap between the two magazines, crew would have to move 6 or so tiles at 50% speed for some reloads equivalent to about 24 tiles in moving walkway. It might be an interesting experiment. You will probably need more crew though, since you can't have those crew at the front of the magazine wander all the way back to refill a storage at in room 50% speeds.

This was a video that was automatically converted to a RUclips short due to the 1:1 aspect ratio. That was late March 2021.

and the video is less than a minute

​@@zanthraswoh interesting, so that's why

Well merge sort was first described in 1948, and Quicksort in 1961, so relatively speaking, this video is effectively brand new.

Anything taller than it is wide, or with a 1:1 aspect ratio like this rendered video was classes as a short when shorts started :)

@@zanthrasw Yeah I forgot that they would've done it that way but I think I've seen some videos that somehow aren't considered shorts despite meeting the requirements for it. Maybe vid length? Idk

You could be right. However you would have some synchronization losses and complexity as the threads must communicate how many elements are left to be sorted in each array.

The X postion is the index in the array, and the Y position is the value being sorted. Notice that with quicksort the elements larger than the pivot on the Y axis are swapped to the higher side of the X axis on each iteration. Both algorithms are being done in-place. That's normal for quicksort, with the only operation being to swap two elements of the array. Mergesort on the other hand has to shift the lower subarray up by one index to make room for the head element of the upper subarray at the end of the sorted subarray during the merge. Usually Mergesort would be done with extra temporary array space for the merging to avoid this.

Pivot choice. Determining the optimal pivot would require sorting the list to find out which one is in the middle. So instead, the first, last, and the middle element of the array (by index) are chosen and the median of those three is used as the pivot. A incorrect pivot choice is worse with many worker threads (compared to a single thread implementation), as the imbalance will casue the smaller side to be completely sorted before the larger side is finished and can distribute the sub arrays to the workers. So thread utilization is lower than with optimal pivot choice. Mergesort on the other hand can just divide all the objects up evenly, so avoids that problem.

Probably because it's short.

I looked some stuff up, and I think I know why. This was a computer generated video with a 1:1 aspect ratio, which is probably the limit for the video to be considered "vertical" and be classed as a short.

@@zanthrasw so probably any content with that screen ratio and short duration even from beginning of YT will be on shorts then. I thought shorts only contains recent videos, But this is quite nice.

Sadly no. These are comparison sorts, so you need to have a method to determine if one thing is greater than another. Too many things in life are incomparable!