Let's keep in mind that this API translation is more performent then the original API though (as you can see from the ROG ally windows vs steamOS)
outstanding work by larien however, I just felt strange reading your comment which somehow implied that the translation is the reason for bad performance, when it is actually more performent then the original
Can you tell me an example where this has a difference in behaviour?
Basically somewhere that source would not behave as you wanted?
I'm also uncertain what you mean wrt a binary. A binary will only have the environment variables available to the shell it's executed in - or do you mean that you'd also want it to inherit variables the binary itself might read from disk via .env files or similar?
I think I remember exactly what you're talking about, even though I completely forgot what software it was.
I believe it was a technical documentation and the author wanted to create visual associations with acteurs in the given example. Like clock for async process of ordering, (food -) order, Burger etc.
I don't remember if I commented on the issue myself, but I do remember that it reduced readability a lot - at least for me.
I mean Amsterdam is kinda renown exactly for reducing parking availability, slow speed limits and generally human-first city planning nowadays.
Wasn't always like that either. In the 90s it was cars-first just like the OP likes nowadays.
It's definitely true that having only bicycle infrastructure doesn't really work for families though. It's a different story if you've got a cargo bike and public transport... But it's understandable that that's not even entering his mind considering the culture of the USA.
Agreed, I only know of a handfull families that manage with no nearby public transport using bicycle only. It is possible, I managed doing 50km for couple of months with a cargo bike and small kids, you adapt. I do not recommend that to anyone unless you really want to, it is just too cheap to own a couple of cars.
It's only cheap because they are heavily subsidized. And then we go back to a discussion about policy. If you remove all the subsidies or make car-owners pay for the externalities, things would quickly turn in favor for higher density, public transit, and AFAIK no game has put this into their game economics.
The forthcoming Car Park Capital[0] looks like an interesting reflection of your sentiment (but it's about planning cities to make them more car centric).
You are looking at the cost in your pocket, not the aggregate.
Add the cost of the gas needed to power all these cars, plus the cost of the land allocated solely for parking, plus the costs of the roads, plus the costs in healthcare associated with air pollution, plus the environmental cost of all the concrete and steel need to build and maintain the roads, etc.
It's not just "car ownership", it's "car-centric infrastructure" that is expensive.
Because car-based roads are so fucking noisy, we throw a ton of green space and front yards to mitigate it. Not to mention "sidewalks" are unnecessary when you can just walk in the centre of the street.
The size of a traditional road is about 6 metres wide or less (that's measured from the front wall of the building on one side, to the front wall of the building on the opposite side). In comparison, the same wall-to-wall measure of a car-centric suburban street comes out to, IIRC, 20-30 metres. That's 3-5x the cost in just land alone, let alone maintenance.
And yes, we will need some roads - about 20% or so, as arterial roads. But right now we're closer to 100%, and most of the throughput of arterial roads is tied up in one-occupant passenger vehicles rather than actually necessary cargo/tradie vehicles.
I'm not American, but with how many software engineers having gotten laid off over the last 4 years, reducing foreign workers competing for the same positions should be a given from the perspective of governing a nation.
I'm surprised how divisive such a decision seems to be considering our current reality of a contracting industry (employment wise)
This is anecdote, but majority of the folks that Microsoft has on H1B from India are people who were hired in India in the first place and were allowed to move over because it was “worth it”. Microsoft specifically will be fine with Indian H1Bs even if they don’t want to pay $100k.
Let's be real here, the metric the foreign workers are mainly competing on is price.
The average tech immigrant is not particularly more bright then the average native dev, and the truly outstanding ones can still be given entrance just my paying 100k - which should be entirely neglectable for world class talent.
The H1 system requires the sponsoring company to prove there are no available US citizen candidates. Perhaps the appropriate move would be to look at eliminating fraud in that area. If there are large numbers of available qualified candidates then under the existing system H1-B applications should drop to zero.
Indians would rather import more Indians than hire anybody else (including Indian Americans) domestically. This is well understood by looking at lawsuits against WITCH companies, and by speaking with anyone who has seen what happens when an Indian attains a leadership role in a tech company. That’s why you get downvoted and suspect it’s controversial. It’s not controversial to anyone but Indians.
Without it there's some silly inconsistency. For example I could call `person?.SetName(name)`, but if you wanted to refactor that into `person?.Name = name` you can't.
My take is that it’s pretty minor. Modern C# has across the board null checking and for the most part you’re not designing things where this even comes up. You are, however, correct, in that I have 100% seen the ?SetName thing used by devs who just wanted to make the null checker go away and didn’t actually think about what the correct behaviour was.
As someone who comes from a language with no ? (or equivalent) who only dabbles in C#, it actually seemed a little weird to me that this was one of the contexts where it wasn't usable.
So as a casual observer, I'd say it brings more consistency.
But also as a casual observer, my opinion is low-value.
$5/month vs eg $2/month with a long running sub with e.g. PIA (Chinese owners) though... I wish mullvad provided long running subs with better prices then what they currently provide.
You are correct:
"Kape Technologies is a United Kingdom-based cybersecurity software company. Kape owns VPN services and cybersecurity tools, including CyberGhost, Private Internet Access (PIA), ZenMate, ExpressVPN, and Intego."
Buy a year voucher off Amazon, comes to $4.75/mo. Or be lucky like me and buy the 6 month for $29 from them and receive a 12 month voucher instead when they grab the wrong one.
What they actually do is a moderate effort to keep app developers from accessing user data. Which is definitely good!
Though the reason for this likely more about keeping the customer relationship with apple then actually protecting the privacy of users, but it's a nicely marketable side effect - and that's definitely a good thing for the users, too!
Anybody who was anybody back then was an active participant in PRISM. There are no good guys and bad guys when it comes to that. There are businesses that get to keep doing business by doing what the government tells them to do, there are ones that shut down (Lavabit), and there are ones that don't have enough going on to be on the radar for a project like PRISM.
But at the end of the day, you gotta be able to sleep with yourself and I have no idea what I'd choose if I were a CEO. Everyone lost their jobs. He did wrong outside of PRISM, so it's hard to say. I'm not him and I already don't sleep well at night.
First time I hear such negativity about tomshardware but the only time I actually looked at one of their tests in detail was with their series that tests for burn-in for consumer OLED TVs and displays. But the other reviews I glances at in that contexts looked pretty solid from a casual glance
Can you elaborate wrt the reason for your critique considering they're pretty much just testing from the perspective of the consumer? I thought their explicit goal is not to provide highly technical analysis and niche preferences but instead look at it for John Doe that's thinking about buying X, and what it would mean for his usecases. From my mental model of that perspective, they're reporting was pretty spot on and not shoddy, but I'm not an expert on the topic
As someone that I read Tom's since it was ran by Thomas, I found the quality of the articles a lot lower than almost 30 years ago. I don't remember when I stopped checking it daily, but I guess it is over 15 years ago.
Maybe the quality looks good to you, but maybe you don't know what it used to be 25 years ago to compare to. Maybe it is a problem of wrong baseline.
The article I linked to is basically just a very basic retelling of the video by some YouTuber. I decided to link to it as I prefer linking to text sources rather than videos.
The video isn't perfect, but I thought it had some interesting data points regardless.
> they're pretty much just testing from the perspective of the consumer
Yes. that's their schtick. Do just enough so that the average non-tech literate user doesn't know any better. And if you're just a casual consumer/reader, It's fine. Not great, not even necessarily accurate, but most of their readership don't know enough to know any better (and that's on purpose). I don't believe their intentionally misleading people. Rather - simply put - It's evident the amount of fucks they give regarding accuracy, veracity, depth, and journalism in general is decidedly less than their competition.
If you're trying to gain an actual technical insight with any real depth or technical merit, toms is absolutely not the place to go. Compare to ServeTheHome (servers, networking, storage, and other homelab and enterprise space related stuff), GN (gaming focused), RTings.com (Displays and peripherals), to name a few to see the night and difference between people that know what they're talking about and strive to be accurate and frame things in the right context, and compare that with what Toms does.
Again, depends on what the user is looking for, but Toms is catering to the casual crowd, aka people who don't know any better and aren't gonna look any deeper. Which is totally fine, but it's absolutely not a source for nuance, insight, depth, rigor, or anything like that.
The article in question[0] is actually a great example of this. They found a youtube video of someone buying white-label drives, with no control to compare it to, nor further analysis to confirm that the 4 drives in question actually all had the same design, firmware, controller, and/or NAND flash underneath (absolutely not a given with bargain bin white label flash, which these were, and it can make a big difference). I'm not trying to hate on the youtuber, there's nothing wrong with their content, but rather with how Toms presents it as an investigation into unpowered SSD endurance while in the same article they themselves admit: "We also want to say this is a very small test sample, highlighted out of our interest in the topic rather than for its hard empirical data." This is also why I say I don't believe their trying to be disingenuous. Hell, I give them credit for admitting that. But it is not a quality or reliable source that informs us of anything at all about the nature of flash at large, or even the specific flash in question, because we don't know what the specific flash in question is Again, just because they're the same brand, model and capacity does not mean they're all the same, even for name brand devices. Crucial's MX500 SSD's for example have been around for nearly a decade now, and the drives you buy today are VERY MUCH different from the ones you could buy of the same capacities in 2017 for example.
Don't even get me started on their comments/forums.
So the elevator pitch for this is "if wait-for [1] isn't sufficient and you want a go lang binary to evaluate the behavior or response of the request"?
I however suspect that I wouldn't use it, if I was still working in devops. The niche where a simple wait for the port is insufficient is _extremely_ rare in practice... Because almost everything that needs such either already has the concept of a readiness check to make it available (k8s, LBs, etc) or will retry automatically given the port being open (DB connections etc)
outstanding work by larien however, I just felt strange reading your comment which somehow implied that the translation is the reason for bad performance, when it is actually more performent then the original
reply