My problem with Casey is that he is not a performance engineer, he is a performance maximalist. Software is a set of tradeoffs. If he truly cared about performance, the best thing for him to do would be to write clean code that had good performance, but he refuses to do that, since it's hard. Instead he insists that the only way to do performance is to write unmaintainable code which ironically enough makes it difficult to do performance optimizations because it's hard to lean on abstractions that allow for things to be refactored.
> he insists that the only way to do performance is to write unmaintainable code
This is new to me, where does he say this specifically?
Not to white knight Casey but his niche has been in rendering and graphics afaik , where everything he does have to fit inbetween frames, so it makes sense to be a "performance maximalist" in that environment.
It could be that you and he are working on different sets of problems with different tools.
But I'd be really interested I where he says you must write unmaintainable code.
Also (my take) : if you're looking at "clean code" to find abstractions that allow things to be refactored, then I think that's probably not the type of performance he's talking about for you. LLMs can do that type of work. FWIW I think he refactors from what things ought to be, not how they are currently
Obviously he's not going to call his own code unmaintainable, but he's basically against abstractions which let people write software that needs to survive past a frame. BTW I have found that LLMs are kind of bad at doing refactoring (like, they can mechanically do a refactor, but they cannot actually help you with picking what refactor you'd want to do)
