190
PREMATURE OPTIMIZATION The Root of ALL Evil @akitaonrails
| Date post: | 15-Jan-2017 |
| Category: |
Technology |
| Upload: | fabio-akita |
| View: | 724 times |
| Download: | 0 times |
PREMATUREOPTIMIZATION
The Root of ALL Evil
@akitaonrails
PREMATUREOPTIMIZATION
The Root of ALL Evil
@akitaonrails
2.0
@akitaonrails
Uber para segurança particular
Uber para advogados
Uber para maconha
Uber para massagem
Uber para álcool
Uber para lavanderia
Uber para passeio de cachorro
Airbnb para barcos
Airbnb para cachorros
Airbnb para equipamentos
Airbnb para acampamentos
Airbnb para banheiros (!!)
Airbnb para impressão 3D
Airbnb para cozinhas
Tinder para sapatos
Tinder para cachorros
Tinder para notícias
Tinder para networking
Tinder para empregos
Tinder para saias
“The Social Network" (2010)
“The Social Network" (2010)
“The Social Network" (2010)
“The Social Network" (2010)
“The Social Network" (2010)
“The Social Network" (2010)
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Samus 221 120 101 19 896
2 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
5 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
8 Wario 207 102 105 -3 760
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Samus (2nd) wins from Wario (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Samus 221 120 101 19 896
2 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
5 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
8 Wario 207 102 105 -3 760
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Samus (2nd) wins from Wario (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Samus 221 120 101 19 896
2 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
5 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
8 Wario 207 102 105 -3 760
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Samus (2nd) wins from Wario (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Samus 221 120 101 19 896
2 Kong 227 117 110 7 732
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
5 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
8 Wario 207 102 105 -3 760
9 Bowser 196 92 104 -12 845
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Kong (2nd) loses to Bowser (10th) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
2 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
3 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
6 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
9 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
2 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
3 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
6 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
9 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
10 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
2 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
3 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
6 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
9 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
2 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
3 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
6 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
9 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
2 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
3 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
6 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
9 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
2 Zelda 160 81 79 2 847
3 Samus 211 110 101 9 842
4 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
5 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
6 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
7 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
8 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
9 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Zelda 170 91 79 12 904
2 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
5 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
8 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
9 Samus 221 110 111 -1 775
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Zelda (2nd) wins from Samus (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Zelda 170 91 79 12 904
2 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
5 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
8 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
9 Samus 221 110 111 -1 775
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Zelda (2nd) wins from Samus (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Zelda 170 91 79 12 904
2 Pikachu 209 105 104 1 851
3 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
4 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
5 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
8 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
9 Samus 221 110 111 -1 775
10 Fox 208 95 113 -18 754
Zelda (2nd) wins from Samus (3rd) 10 times
Name Games Wins Loses Points Elo Rating
1 Zelda 170 91 79 12 904
2 Luigi 186 95 91 4 841
3 Fox 218 105 113 -8 829
4 Wario 197 102 95 7 824
5 Mario 203 101 102 -1 820
6 Yoshi 223 112 111 1 803
7 Kong 217 117 100 17 802
8 Bowser 186 82 104 -22 785
9 Samus 221 110 111 -1 775
10 Pikachu 219 105 114 -9 766
Pikachu (2nd) loses to Fox (10th) 10 times
ELO Rating System
Microsoft TrueSkill Rating System
Google PageRank
Facebook EdgeRank
.NETC
CoffeeScriptElixir
F#
Groovy
Java
JavaScriptObjective-C
PHP
Perl PythonRuby
Swift
Visual Basic .NET
.NET
C
CoffeeScript
ElixirF#
Groovy
Java JavaScript
Objective-C
PHPPerl
Python
Ruby
Swift
Visual Basic .NET
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Speedcode (1953) John Backus
- interpreter took 310 memory words, about 30% of the memory available on a 701
- twenty times that of machine code
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Fortran (1957) John Backus
- first optimizing compiler - complex number types/
electric engineering
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
CPL (1963) Christopher Strachey
- Combined/Cambridge/Combined Programming Language
- low and high level
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
BCPL (1966) Martin Richards
- Basic CPL - Bootstrap CPL - popular choice
for bootstrapping a system
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
occam (1983) INMOS
- concurrent programming language - Bootstrap CPL - communication between processes
work through named channels
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Algol (1958) ETH Zürich committee
- Algol 58, Algol 60, Algol 68, Algol W - Context-free Grammars (Backus-Naur Form/BNF) - "ALGOL 68 was the first (and possibly one of the last)
major language for which a full formal definition was made before it was implemented”
- “ALGOL 68 has been criticized, most prominently by some members of its design committee such as Hoare and Dijkstra, for abandoning the simplicity of ALGOL 60”
- "Steve Bourne, who was on the Algol 68 revision committee, took some of its ideas to his Bourne shell (and thereby, to descendant shells such as Bash) and to C (and thereby to descendants such as C++)."
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Modula (1960) Niklaus Wirth
- "One of the first languages designed from the start for modular programming"
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
MUMPS (1966) Neil Pappalardo
- "Massachusetts General Hospital Utility Multi-Programming System”
- hierarchical ACID built-in database - InterSystems Caché (SQL driver)
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
ADA (1966) MIL-STD
- strong typing, generics - modularity mechanisms (packages) - run-time checking
- access to unallocated memory, buffer overflow errors, range violations, off-by-one errors, array access errors, and other detectable bugs
- parallel processing (tasks, synchronous message passing, protected objects, and
- nondeterministic select statements) - exception handling - widely used in critical systems, where any anomaly might
lead to very serious consequences, e.g., accidental death, injury or severe financial loss. Examples of systems where Ada is used include avionics,ATC, railways, banking, military and space technology
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Hope (1970s) Edinburgh University
- NPL and Hope: first languages with call-by-pattern evaluation
- influenced Standard ML, Haskell
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
SNOBOL (1962) AT&T Bell Labs
- patterns as a first-class data type - operators for pattern
concatenation and alternation - early regular expressions/pattern
matching
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
FLOW-MATIC (1955) Grace Hopper
- 1952 - A0 compiler - 1959 - COBOL - English-like high level
language
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Simula (1967) Ole-Johan Dahl, Kristen Nygaard
- object-oriented programming - inheritance and subclasses - virtual methods, coroutines - Garbage Collector
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
CLU (1974) Barbara Liskov
- early object-oriented programming - classes with constructors and methods,
without inheritance - iterators, abstract data types, type-safe
parameterized/variant types - multiple return values (parallel
assignment)
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
ISWIM (1965) Peter J. Landin
- "If you See What I Mean" - functional programming
(SASL, Miranda, ML, Haskell) - lazy evaluation
(SASL, KRC, Hope, Miranda, Haskell,
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Miranda (1985) David Turner
- lazy, purely functional programming - list comprehensions (Haskell)
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Clean (1987) Radboud University Nijmegen
- mutable state and I/O is done through a uniqueness typing system (Haskell Monads)
- performance comparable to Haskell
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Self (1987) David Ungar, Randall Smith
- dialect of Smalltalk (OOP) - prototype-based (Javascript) - Just in time Compiling (JVM)
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Prolog (1972) Alain Colmerauer
- logic programming (influenced Erlang) - natural language processing - relations, represented as facts and rules
- running a query over these relations
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Erlang (1986) Joe Armstrong, Robert Virding and Mike Williams
- distributed, fault-tolerant, soft-real-time, non-stop applications. It supports hot swapping
- processes communicate using message passing
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
ML (1973) Robin Milner/University of Edinburgh
- Hindley–Milner type system - parametric polymorphism - “Type Inference”
- ML Family (Standard ML, OCaml), Clean, Haskell
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
REBOL (1997) Carl Sassenrath
- "Relative Expression Based Object Language"
- dialecting: small, optimized, Domain-Specific Language (DSL) for code and data
- influenced JSON
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
• APL (1964) introduced: array programming, influenced: functional programming
• ALGOL (1958) refined both structured procedural programming and the discipline of language specification.
• Simula (1967) first language designed to support object-oriented programming; Smalltalk (1972) followed with the first "purely" object-oriented language.
• C (1969 - 1973) popular system programming language
• Prolog (1972), first logic programming language. • ML (1978) built a polymorphic type system on top of
Lisp, pioneering statically typed functional programming languages.
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015FORTRAN (1957) John Backus
- FORTRAN 2015
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
COBOL (1959) Conference on Data Systems Languages (CODASYL)
- COBOL 2014
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
23%
32%
45%
Python Fortran C
500k LOC
Gordon Moore - Intel co-founder
0
1,000,000,000
2,000,000,000
3,000,000,000
4,000,000,000
5,000,000,000
6,000,000,000
7,000,000,000
8,000,000,000
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Intel1Processors1Transistor1Count
0
1,000,000,000
2,000,000,000
3,000,000,000
4,000,000,000
5,000,000,000
6,000,000,000
7,000,000,000
8,000,000,000
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Intel1Processors1Transistor1Count
Intel 400410 µm Intel 80386 Pentium
0.8 µm
Itanium 2
Six-core Xeon 7400
8-core Itanium Poulson32 nm
18-core Xeon Haswell-E522 nm
15-core Xeon Ivy Bridge-EX
Duo-core + GPU Core i7 Broadwell-U14 nm
0
1,000,000,000
2,000,000,000
3,000,000,000
4,000,000,000
5,000,000,000
6,000,000,000
7,000,000,000
8,000,000,000
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Intel1Processors1Transistor1Count
Intel 400410 µm Intel 80386 Pentium
0.8 µm
Itanium 2
Six-core Xeon 7400
8-core Itanium Poulson32 nm
18-core Xeon Haswell-E522 nm
15-core Xeon Ivy Bridge-EX
Duo-core + GPU Core i7 Broadwell-U14 nm
Apple A7
Apple A8
Apple A8X20 nm
Gordon Bell - DEC early employee
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
Workstations
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
Workstations
PersonalComputers
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
Workstations
PersonalComputers
ScalableClusters
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
Workstations
PersonalComputers
Small Devices
ScalableClusters
$100M
$10M
$1M
$100K
$10k
$1k
$100
$10
1940 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Supercomputadores
Minicomputadores
Workstations
PersonalComputers
Small Devices
ScalableClusters
Vaticano 2005
Vaticano 2013
2010 2011 2012 2013 20142006 2007 2008 2009
2010 2011 2012 2013 20142006 2007 2008 2009
2010 2011 2012 2013 20142006 2007 2008 2009
2017 60 anos de FORTRAN
2017 60 anos de FORTRAN
2014 55 anos de COBOL
2017 60 anos de FORTRAN
2014 55 anos de COBOL
2013 55 anos de LISP
2017 60 anos de FORTRAN
2014 55 anos de COBOL
2013 55 anos de LISP
2012 40 anos de Smalltalk
2017 60 anos de FORTRAN
2014 55 anos de COBOL
2013 55 anos de LISP
2012 40 anos de Smalltalk
2015 35 anos de ADA
Séc XVII Cálculo Newton/Leibniz
Séc XVII Cálculo Newton/Leibniz
1930's Lambda Calculus Alonzo Church
Séc XVII Cálculo Newton/Leibniz
1930's Lambda Calculus Alonzo Church
1939 Elo Rating System Arpad Elo
Séc XVII Cálculo Newton/Leibniz
1930's Lambda Calculus Alonzo Church
1939 Elo Rating System Arpad Elo
1975 Vector Space Model Gerald Salton
SPA e-commerce
SPA e-commercehttp://www.loja.com.br/#!/produtos/item-001
SPA e-commercehttp://www.loja.com.br/#!/produtos/item-001
http://www.loja.com.br/?_escaped_fragment_=/produtos/item-001
High Level Numbers
Client #1
$ 4,000
$ 4,000($ 7 MI/yr revenue - 0.68%)
Client #2
$ 100,000+
$ 100,000+($ 800 MI/yr revenue - 0.15%)
• Minimum IT Cost:
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• USD 4000 - 1 “Responsible” (Manager, Marketing, etc)
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• USD 4000 - 1 “Responsible” (Manager, Marketing, etc)
• Total: USD 8.000/month (USD 96.000/year)
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• USD 4000 - 1 “Responsible” (Manager, Marketing, etc)
• Total: USD 8.000/month (USD 96.000/year)
• Minimum Business Requirement:
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• USD 4000 - 1 “Responsible” (Manager, Marketing, etc)
• Total: USD 8.000/month (USD 96.000/year)
• Minimum Business Requirement:
• Revenue: > USD 2 MI / year
• Minimum IT Cost:
• USD 1000 - Cloud Services
• USD 3000 - 1 Developer
• USD 4000 - 1 “Responsible” (Manager, Marketing, etc)
• Total: USD 8.000/month (USD 96.000/year)
• Minimum Business Requirement:
• Revenue: > USD 2 MI / year
• IT Cost / Revenue ratio: < 5%
Increase Revenue>
Lower Costs
Innovation
Impossible Yesterday
Possible Today
Innovation
Constraints
PREMATUREOPTIMIZATIONis the Root of all Evil
