Yeah, although one can argue they are badly designed if they do so from the performance/energy perspective.

Of course, but there are many situations in which one must deal with the input one is given.

You can share a monitor between two computers.

What do you on macOS that isn't available on Windows? Really curious.

Not OP- but I do a lot of work with containers and orchestration- and being on a Unix filesystem with native POSIX shell is very helpful

WSL2 on Windows is quite nice now.

Docker on MacOS is notoriously slow though - I use it myself sometimes, and it's never a good experience.

I’m not sure if it’s true anymore. I experienced good performance when they switched to using xhyve/bhyve (basically use docker for mac). Can you shade more light on your experience? When was this? What circumstances? Which kind of apps?

Using Docker Desktop (which I believe runs Docker in a Linux VM - basically a friendly version of when when it was Docker Machine), with different containers - RabbitMQ, EMQ, Postgres, Minio, lots of our own images. I haven't used it for perhaps 6-9 months, but it was never fun - would grind the whole macbook to a painful pace.

If there's some kind of alternative for MacOS now, I'm keen to know more.

It's not always about what you do, but what tools you use to do it.

I don't want my fundamental tool to be windows because I don't enjoy using it for hundreds of reasons - there's really not much more to it for me.

Usually it’s either iOS/macOS development or media editing.

The problem is not the "open" development.

The actual issue is this new Microsoft full of half-done projects and trying to reduce engineering costs. They even try to make others write the documentation for their products... MSDN is gone and now docs are a mess.

Ballmer was a mess, but at least he got the devs-first bit right. Nowadays it is devs-last, cloud-first.

Here I have to sadly agree, but I think the cause is something else. Lots of new blood full with ideas to leave their mark.

I built a high end desktop after exclusively using desktops for a decade because Unity WebGL builds are so awful. It is the slowest, most opaque and buggiest build chain I have used since I made Flash games.

I expect it would replace the need for the burst compiler, and likely reduce the complexity of the job system (especially its need for special types.) There is also an observed performance gain switching from IL2CPP to CoreRT, which would be 100% free.

Was that performance gain proven with benchmarks across all hardware platforms that Unity supports as deployment target?

I think the idea is to consolidate effort to a single C#-to-native path that is not proprietary.

I agree the the Users of Unity may or not see gains in the short term

GP is not talking about an empty app project.

It's a minimalist web app that responds to HTTP requests without using MVC, not a console app?

Also languages and bugs.

It is not named after him, at least now: the tool is called Compiler Explorer.

The thing is that he originally served it from its domain so people use both interchangeably.

> The thing is that he originally served it from its domain so people use both interchangeably.

And it still is, right? Or is there also a Compiler Explorer domain?

It's on https://compiler-explorer.com/ too. But it's too long to type, and so many weblinks point at godbolt.org that I've long since accepted that while its name is definitely "Compiler Explorer", folks will call it "godbolt" and type that into their browser. It's shorter and frankly when life gifts you a surname like mine, why not accept it? :)

for fun it's also on godbo.lt

That applies to many conservative languages like the usual classic suspects such as C or Fortran.

In fact, in comparison, Go is pretty unstable compared to those two once you take into account the total time they have existed.

It is definitely not unique to Go.

A 1.5 years old phone is not "somewhat old"... if anything, it is pretty new.

In many countries, it is not even out of warranty!

Yes, some people change phones every year, but that does not mean the device itself is old just because you change it.

2 ms per 10 files is a huge amount of time.

You're right! I was executing time go run main.go

I now built the exe and ran:

    real    0m0.199s
    user    0m0.000s
    sys     0m0.014s

So 0.2s for 10k files on the worst possible hardware/software scenario I could find nearby. Edited my original comment. Thanks!

You're welcome!

It is still a ton of time, about an order of magnitude more than optimal if the real/sys time split is to be believed.