There is no "more correct"

[stefanludwig]

Reproducing the behavior

README.md says this:

HVM2 is the successor to HVM1, a 2022 prototype of this concept. Compared to its predecessor, HVM2 is simpler, faster and, most importantly, more correct.

There is no "more correct". It's either correct or not. It can't be more correct.

A similar common phrase is "more optimal". Optimal means the best, the top. There is no "more best".

Yeah, minor detail, but as Reacher says: "Details matter". :-)

System Settings

Example:

• OS: [e.g. Linux (Ubuntu 22.04)]
• CPU: [e.g. Intel i9-14900KF]
• GPU: [e.g. RTX 4090]
• Cuda Version [e.g. release 12.4, V12.4.131]

Additional context

No response

[Inferno-P]

Nice Reacher reference!! "Details matter" and "Assumptions kill" :)

[Rudxain]

I'd argue "more correct" (informally) means "lesser bugs" or "less wrong", so it could be replaced by "HVM2 has less bugs".

About "optimal", there's the concept of local-optima and global-optima. When people say "more optimal" they (colloquially) mean that the implementation is in a local-optimum whose y-value ("optimality" in a plot) is closer to the y-value of the global-optimum than some other implementation. The x-value would be a machine in the countable-set of Turing-machines (TMs are enumerable by integers)

At this point, I'm nit-picking your nit-picking, so this convo is prone to getting derailed until someone mentions an XKCD, Leonhard Euler, or a famous Austrian painter with a funny mustache; whichever happens first, lol

[stefanludwig]

I agree with both colloquial interpretations. But I can't help it. Whenever I see it, I shudder...

XKCD for the win!