muxator

The C++20 coroutines has the potential of being this and much more. As with many things C++, its adoption will be very slow (they are supported by latest compiler versions, but there is no support in the standard libraries yet).

Now I am curious if, in the real MDN production site, serach-index.json loading is triggered by the execution of /static/js/autocomplete.js, when their download should really be started in parallel by the shim.

Many websites leave a lot of performance on the table because of such behaviors.

My hypothesis is that, since this is easier for the developer, and works good enough, not many people really care. But these things add up, and the web becomes slower and slower.

In this context, the measuring aspect would be taken care by profiling/instrumenting.

Isn't this scary?

Is it still a thing?

You can well have a government organization which embraces the cloud, yet keeps exactly the same level of paperwork for acquiring or activating resources. It is a cultural matter well before a technological one.

Digital components may well be more reliable than corresponding analog ones. They can also be purely hw, with no sw or just a simple firmware. There is a middle ground between analog circuits and a general purpose programmable computer with windows 10 on it. :)

Anyway, progressive jpeg2000 decoding is more sophisticated than progressive jpeg

Maybe I'm old. I never used to think that an application that is able to use my whole ram is optimized. It evokes exactly the opposite impression, indeed.

I think I understand what you mean, but the gut reaction is that one.

Yeah, I am really old, after all.

Edit: let me explain. Something that is able to use the whole space of a flat memory model is way less sophisticated than something that is able to deal with a complex memory hierarchy. Our machines are indeed a complex pyramid of different subsystems with varying bandwidth and latency characteristics. A program that is able to embrace the inherent hierarchical nature of our machines (or multi-node systems) is way more "optimized", according to my sensibility.

What's the most appropriate word for this? There could be many, but I am a bit tired of justifications. For me it's greediness, distillated.

The existence of the autocommit feature in DB drivers is something I never really understood: why an application developer would want to relinquish the direct control of one of the most powerful features of a relational DB?

Unless one's interaction with the database are really basic (i.e. a single SELECT statement), one would want to be as explicit as possible regarding where transaction boundaries are.

Having a default that hides this aspect from my code always seemed a false convenience to me.

edit: this is just a tangential reflection inspired by your comment, not an answer / nor I wanted to detract from your fact statement.

> This benchmark does not mention the memory consumed by the database itself - this is intentional. [...] Whether you decide to use the database or not, the memory is already paid for, so you might as well use it!

This sentence is a big red flag for me. An analysis of a stategy that pushes work towards a subsystem, and then purposedly ignores the perforance implications on that subsystem is methodologically unsound.

Personally, I am all for using the DB and writing good SQL. But if I weren't, this argument would not convince me.

Excalidraw is a gem. I discovered it weeks ago, and cannot but praise it. The online instance is free and works really well, plus you have the possibility of hosting your own copy and be completely independent.

I also saw that there is the possibility of doing collaborative real time drawing, but still did not try it.

I have seen that the exported SVGs could be simplified (lots of repeated markup), and I am thinking about giving a try to do a PR.

Excalidraw is superb.

Thank you.

So this is a case of me not looking well enough while exploring many different solutions.

I have to say that reading this passage on one of the getting started guides (https://www.pulumi.com/docs/get-started/azure/create-project...):

> If this is your first time running pulumi new or most other pulumi commands, you will be prompted to log in to the Pulumi service. > The Pulumi CLI works in tandem with the Pulumi service in order to deliver a reliable experience. It is free for individual use, with features available for teams.

did not help. At least mentioning that the Pulumi service could be self hosted would have helped.

Thanks again.

Last time I checked (admittedly, not so hard) I discovered that Pulumi only works by calling in to the mothership: i.e.: you cannot build an airgapped infrastructure with it.

This was very off-putting for me, and I had to give up on Pulumi. Is something changed on this regard?

I whish I could do the same with a CPU that supports ECC ram. Unfortunately, a fanless CPU with ECC support (the Atom x6000 for example) is almost a chimera, or really really expensive.

> Sometimes it seems to me that the perception of your importance is proportional to the number of bugs in your code.

That's incredible, isn't it? it's one of the many possible manifestations of "worse is better", I fear.

This project has existed for mor than 6 years. It is a fork of RhodeCode, which has existed for more than a decade.

When rhodecode went closed source, Kallithea was forked, and has been maintained ever since.

You have my upvote for "corporate spyware" :)

Probably yes

Short answer is: it is eliminated through respiration, and becomes CO2

hg incoming and hg outgoing are really useful.

When I am in git, I use this version from https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Git-hg-rosetta-stone#set...:

    [alias]
    outgoing = !git fetch && git log FETCH_HEAD..
    incoming = !git fetch && git log ..FETCH_HEAD

Feature-wise, the mercurial command is way more powerful: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/hg.1.html#incoming

How so? Why there should be a head of line blocking? This would be a simple multiplexing of the payloads.

"refactoring" means changing the (often implicit) structure of code without changing its external behaviour.

In this case "reorganized" or "repartitioned" could probably be more apt.

If we'd talked about software here (and not disk layout), I'd have considered less leniently the use of "refactoring", and a hint of unclear intentions.

Sorry for being so nitpicky, but this is a sore thumb from too many "refactorings" that are, indeed, somenthing else.

> People want native apps.

I'll take a well done web page anytime over a native app.

I wouldn't trust that script too much: there is no error checking at all.

What happens when s3cmd fails and after two months you discover the "Vault sync succeded" emails you have been getting were all illusory?

If the author is reading: please take the time to update your example, including proper error checking (at least "set -eu"), otherwise the people on the internet that are going to copy your script are in for a hard time.

Skeleton of the "incriminated" script:

  #!/bin/bash
  [...]
  s3cmd sync ...
  [...]
  notify-send [...] "Vault sync succeded [...]"

That video was really clear, thanks!

> You know those mono-to-stereo mixing tricks that you’re not “supposed” to do because of mono compatibility, but you end up doing all the time anyway? You know, like the one where you double the track, pan the two versions out and delay one side?

Is there a name for this effect? I'd like to hear an example!

The Intel vtune profiler [0] bolts on linux's perf subsystem and offers a very nice way of assessing if the cpu is stalled on memory (or cache) or os spending its time computing. I guess is a nice GUI on (nowadays) standard Linux tracing interfaces, but I really did not dig enough.

If you are after deep profiling, you should definitely give it a try. My recollection is totally positive.

[0] https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/tools/o...

> Por causas ajenas a Vodafone, esta web no esta disponible

"Due to causes independent on Vodafone, this website is not available".

How so? This is plain false. I bet they do not even inform their customers that the connectivity service they sell is endangered by Deep Packet Inspection.