Christopher Jeffrey (JJ)

> @addaleax stated that these functions should not be used, and should therefore not be optimized. I really don't understand this logic. If it's never supposed to be used, why...

@anonrig, pleased to hear you say that. I'm going to rewrite everything as a branchless loop I think. I was going to leave it as-is, but the whole "no optimizations...

@lemire, I apologize if my post sounded like it was directed at you. I didn't mean for it to be. It was more generalized frustration towards the "no optimization" philosophy.

[Here][1] is a [branchless version of the loop][2]. I don't know if everyone is okay with that, but it works well and gives a slight speedup over the current code...

> If you really want to throw O in here, be aware that O(n*70) = O(n*100000) = O(n). True. I suppose it's still just linear at the end of the...

> I don't know why you bring up your industry, nor do I know much about your industry, but I do appreciate the irony of promoting proof-of-work cryptocurrencies while arguing...

> If we decide to optimize these functions I would prefer we go with the approach in https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/38433 and reuse code that's shared by other buffer methods, instead of creating...

> I sincerely apologize if my remark about our opposing opinions on cryptocurrencies offended you. @tniessen, no apology necessary. It's perfectly okay to disagree with my opinions on PoW. Many...

> Sorry to post this here, but I couldn't find any way to message Christopher privately. Github messaging is gone, but my email address is on all of my commits....

> Christopher, if you are interested (or if anyone else is, for that matter, please let me know. I suppose an update of this ticket would be enough, and then...