frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

Your ePub Is Fine. Kobo Disagrees. Blame Adobe

https://andreklein.net/your-epub-is-fine-kobo-disagrees-blame-adobe/
220•sohkamyung•4h ago•88 comments

Write for One Person

https://wizardzines.com/comics/write-for-one-person/
109•evakhoury•2d ago•36 comments

Show HN: Kage – Shadow any website to a single binary for offline viewing

https://github.com/tamnd/kage
423•tamnd•9h ago•94 comments

Bitsy

https://bitsy.org/
45•tosh•3d ago•3 comments

Firewood Splitting Simulator

https://screen.toys/firewood/
672•memalign•4d ago•218 comments

Rio de Janeiro's "homegrown" LLM appears to be a merge of an existing model

https://github.com/nex-agi/Nex-N2/issues/4
293•unrvl22•11h ago•156 comments

21 years and counting of 'eight fallacies of distributed computing' (2025)

https://blog.apnic.net/2025/12/08/21-years-and-counting-of-eight-fallacies-of-distributed-computing/
16•teleforce•2h ago•2 comments

Why Your CPU Is Fast but Your Program Is Slow: Understanding the Memory Wall

https://prawns.dev/blogs/memory-wall
14•prawns_1205•3d ago•4 comments

AI is code – and can't be prompted into being smarter

https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/06/14/ai-is-code-and-cant-be-prompted-into-being-smart...
90•wglb•6h ago•51 comments

Show HN: Trace – Offline Mac meeting transcripts you can flag mid-call

https://traceapp.info
106•AG342•1d ago•45 comments

Chaosnet (1981)

https://tumbleweed.nu/r/lm-3/uv/amber.html
68•RGBCube•7h ago•7 comments

Ask HN: What are you working on? (June 2026)

165•david927•10h ago•616 comments

Formal methods and the future of programming

https://blog.janestreet.com/formal-methods-at-jane-street-index/?from_theconsensus=1
205•eatonphil•14h ago•74 comments

TorchCodec 0.14: HDR Video Decoding for CPU and CUDA, and Fast Wav Decoder

https://github.com/meta-pytorch/torchcodec/releases/tag/v0.14.0
26•scott_s•4d ago•3 comments

Segmented type appreciation corner (2018)

https://aresluna.org/segmented-type/
65•unexpectedVCR•3d ago•14 comments

The only scalable delete in Postgres is DROP TABLE

https://planetscale.com/blog/the-only-scalable-delete
139•hollylawly•3d ago•49 comments

Chopped, Stored, Secured – The Story of the Hash Function

https://0xkrt26.github.io/math_behind_security/2026/06/09/the-story-of-the-hash-function.html
26•denismenace•4d ago•4 comments

The hallucinogenic mushroom that contains no known psychedelic

https://psychedelics.co.uk/news/a-mushroom-genus-that-gets-people-high-but-not-the
31•thunderbong•1h ago•12 comments

Caddy compatibility for zeroserve: 3x throughput and 70% lower latency

https://su3.io/posts/zeroserve-caddy-compat
159•losfair•13h ago•49 comments

Perlisisms (1982)

https://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
95•tosh•12h ago•49 comments

Show HN: Discover Wikipedia articles popular on Hacker News

https://www.orangecrumbs.com/
61•octopus143•9h ago•18 comments

FarOutCompany

https://faroutcompany.com/
106•bookofjoe•12h ago•16 comments

I indexed 669 GB of my GoPro videos using my M1 Max computer and local ML models

295•iliashad•11h ago•71 comments

Windows 11 users are tired of MS account requirements creeping into everything

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/windows-11/windows-11-users-are-tired-of-microsoft-accou...
105•josephcsible•5h ago•36 comments

The Birth and Death of JavaScript (2014)

https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript
215•subset•14h ago•123 comments

Lisp's Influence on Ruby

https://blog.tacoda.dev/lisps-influence-on-ruby-6a54f1a7740e
223•tacoda•3d ago•62 comments

USB Power Delivery: Plugging into the Benefits

https://www.aptiv.com/en/insights/article/usb-power-delivery-plugging-into-the-benefits
36•mooreds•3d ago•80 comments

How to earn a billion dollars

https://paulgraham.com/earn.html
475•kingstoned•15h ago•1441 comments

Not everyone is using AI for everything

https://gabrielweinberg.com/p/people-are-consuming-ai-like-they
432•yegg•12h ago•472 comments

Linux 7.1

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wi4BF4bMhZNZ1tqs+FFV4OuZRe3ZqdWB+LxRLmRweUzQw@mail.gmail.com/T/#u
250•berlianta•10h ago•98 comments
Open in hackernews

The Fastest Way yet to Color Graphs

https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-fastest-way-yet-to-color-graphs-20250512/
62•GavCo•1y ago

Comments

tonyarkles•1y ago
In case you haven't looked at the article, this is looking specifically at the Edge Coloring problem and not the more commonly known Vertex Coloring problem. Vertex Coloring is NP-complete unfortunately.
erikvanoosten•1y ago
You can convert edge coloring problems into vertex coloring problems and vice versa through a simple O(n) procedure.
meindnoch•1y ago
Wrong. You can convert edge-coloring problems into vertex-coloring problems of the so-called line graph: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_graph

But the opposite is not true, because not every graph is a line graph of some other graph.

erikvanoosten•1y ago
Indeed. Thanks, I stand corrected.
tonyarkles•1y ago
Hrm... right. It's been a while. And it looks like both Vertex Coloring and Edge Coloring are both NP-complete (because of the O(n) procedure you're talking about and the ability to reduce both problems down to 3-SAT). I've started looking closer at the actual paper to try to figure out what's going on here. Thanks for the reminder, I miss getting to regularly work on this stuff.

Edit: thanks sibling reply for pointing out that it's not a bidirectional transform.

mauricioc•1y ago
For the edge-coloring problem, the optimal number of colors needed to properly color the edges of G is always either Delta(G) (the maximum degree of G) or Delta(G) + 1, but deciding which one is the true optimum is an NP-complete problem.

Nevertheless, you can always properly edge-color a graph with Delta(G) + 1 colors. Finding such a coloring could in principle be slow, though: the original proof that Delta(G) + 1 colors is always doable amounted to a O(e(G) * v(G)) algorithm, where e(G) and v(G) denote the number of edges and vertices of G, respectively. This is polynomial, but nowhere near linear. What the paper in question shows is how, given any graph G, to find an edge coloring using Delta(G) + 1 colors in O(e(G) * log(Delta(G))) time, which is linear time if the maximum degree is a constant.

Syzygies•1y ago
Yes. The article ran through this point as follows:

"In 1964, a mathematician named Vadim Vizing proved a shocking result: No matter how large a graph is, it’s easy to figure out how many colors you’ll need to color it. Simply look for the maximum number of lines (or edges) connected to a single point (or vertex), and add 1."

I keep wondering why I ever read Quanta Magazine. It takes a pretty generous reading of "need" to make this a correct statement.

JohnKemeny•1y ago
phkahler•1y ago
Is this going to lead to faster compile times? Faster register allocation...
john-h-k•1y ago
Very few compilers actually use vertex coloring for register allocation
isaacimagine•1y ago
Totally. The hard part isn't coloring (you can use simple heuristics to get a decent register assignment), rather, it's figuring out which registers to spill (don't spill registers in hot loops! and a million other things!).
NooneAtAll3•1y ago
and this post isn't even about vertex coloring
DannyBee•1y ago
No.

In SSA, the graphs are chordal, so were already easily colorable (relatively).

Outside of SSA, this is not true, but the coloring is still not the hard part, it's the easy part.

Not really. Coloring a graph is almost always talking about proper coloring, meaning that things that objects that are related receive different colors.

If you read the introduction, you'll also read that the goal is to "color each of your lines and require that for every point, no two lines connected to it have the same color."

Ps. "How many colors a graph needs" is a very well established term in computer science and graph theory.

mockerell•1y ago
I think the comment referred to the phrase „a graph needs X (colors or whatever)“. For me, this can be read two ways: 1. „a graph always needs at least X colors“ or 2. „a graph always needs at most X colors“.

Personally, I would interpret this as option 1 (and so did the comment above I assume). In that case, the statement is wrong. But I’d prefer to specify „at most/ at least“ anyways.

Or even better, use actual vocabulary. „For every graph there exists a coloring with X colors.“ or „any graph can be coloured using X colors“.

PS: I also agree with the sentiment about quanta magazine. It’s hard to get some actual information from their articles if you know the topic.

JohnKemeny•1y ago
What about this statement:

No matter how large a car is, it is easy to figure out how much money you'll need to buy it. Simply look at the price tag.

(From: No matter how large a graph is, it’s easy to figure out how many colors you’ll need to color it. Simply look for the maximum ...)

mauricioc•1y ago
Parent's point is that sometimes (but not always) the store is perfectly fine selling you a car for $1 less than what the "price tag" of Delta(G)+1 dollars asks for, so "need" is a bit inaccurate.