HN user
https://github.com/AlgorithmsAreCool
It is still a thing, just not a very common one since the debugger in VS has become more ergonomic and powerful. But windbg is still the king here, for the most advanced analysis of both managed and unmanaged code and it isn't even close to be honest once you learn the arcane commands and incatations
But why not do it right the first time. This is an obvious performance pitfall for people that want to adopt this feature. It is bizarre to me after the last decade has been dedicated to performance improvments.
Allowing hallucinated content or citations into your work is an act of carelessness and disregard for the time of people that are going to read your paper and it should be policed as such.
And flatly, if a person can't be bothered to check their damn work before uploading it, why should anyone else invest their time in reading it seriously?
Not my project, but I feel mention of IronScheme is appropriate. Leppie has been maintaining it for many years now.
I was just about to select Jint for an internal project, this might be fun to try out and see how it performs`
Why on earth did they decide boxing by default was a sensible design decision...
We have been pushing toward higher performance for years and this is a performance pitfall for unions would are often thought of as being lighter weight than inheritance hierarchies.
F# just stores a field-per-case, with the optimization that cases with the same type are unified which is still type safe.
Well off the top of my head...
Active patterns, computation expressions, structural typing, statically resolved type parameters, explicit inlining, function composition, structural equality, custom operators and much richer generators.
I understand this is an attack, but I find myself mildly concerned that the model is "aware" enough to behave differently in the assumed context of a alignment test. Isn't this an inherent thread of dishonesty?
No. He is a Microsoft Technical Fellow and still a core contributor to the TypeScript compiler.
I am very familiar with it! My current project at work is taking an Orleans based payment processing system to production
I get excited every time I see a paper from Bradish. I've learned so much about high performance software from studying systems that he has worked on. (not to diminish his many co-authors and contributors)
Some of his other projects:
[0] https://github.com/microsoft/garnet [1] https://github.com/microsoft/FASTER [2] https://github.com/microsoft/Trill
The Tree of Life is singular to me as a piece of cinema, americana and a meditation on the beauty of life and especially childhood.
When I saw it the first time, I was so awestruck by the breathtaking cinematography and the incredible music, but even more so by the vision of it all. I had simply never seen anything like it.
I saw it another 4 times before it left theaters.
It could be done, but what would be the virtue of it? Most programming languages are not self-hoisted for a reason.
Like if you build an Excel formula, the mandatory async/await approach just doesn't work. It's not an asynchronous operation and runs into a UI context where you deadlock if you wait.
Last time I did excel interop it was COM based and there wasn't any async part of it. I'm curious if you were using COM interop also? Also, async/await was explicitly designed to work in UI contexts like Winforms and WPF where there is only a single UI thread...?
It took like 15 years before they added a json serializer to the standard library..
That isn't really true. DataContractJsonSerializer [0] landed in .NET 3.5 which was in 2007. Admittedly, it kinda sucked but it was there and was usable. And also JSON.Net was around by that point and was/is excellent.
...and don't even think about support for any new major image format (webp, heic).
Image support on windows was historically provided by WIC [1] and does support the formats you talked about. But you are correct that native .NET support for many image formats is non-existent.
And because they broke backward compatibility on so many libraries, it's a non trivial effort to convert a complex code base to core.
This is very true, and I felt it firsthand. My employer still has a codebase on .NET Framework (compiled against 4.5.2 but deployed against 4.8). It is WCF based and the jump to Core was a massive break. But in the end, I think the break was a good decision. There were just too many design mistakes, bad assumptions and underlying system changes to keep compat across the big leap to a modern multi-platform framework. .NET today is faster, more flexible and has more capabilities than .NET Framework ever did. Even if it did take a long time to get here.
And besides, even if new features are not coming to .NET Framework anymore, Microsoft has support .NET 3.5.1 until 2029! [2] Isn't 22 years of support enough? (.NET 4.8's EOL hasn't even been announced yet!)
[0] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.runtime.... [1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/wic/native-w... [2] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/microso...
My favorite part about the FOGBANK story is that once they figured out how to manufacture it again, the new version of the material was more chemically pure than the old version, but this actually made the material LESS effective, so they had to add spcific impruities back into it to make it work correctly.
[0] https://www.twz.com/32867/fogbank-is-mysterious-material-use...
Isn't Span<T> the exact same concept?
The methodology helps focus the attention of human labelers on the controversial/borderline cases, making them more effective in how they spend thier time.
I'm not sure i understand your comment, .editorconfig works just fine for VB files as well as F#
If you look at Garnet's source code it is very non-idiomatic C#. It goes to extraordinary lengths to avoid the garbage collector. Almost all memory management is done with unmanaged memory and pointers.
They also have a very clever internal design and do some other tricks like strategically avoiding async/await and moving I/O operations onto the network request thread.
That doesn't make it ok or less impactful. He's been running MyNoise for years and it sounds like if he had been attacked before, this one was much worse, prompting a blog post about it.
You are correct but although the B52 can technically carry the GBU-57 MOP, but it was only done that way during the initial testing of the weapon. The B2 is the only aircraft the USAF actually uses for that munition in combat scenarios.
Also the B2 is better suited for extreme endurance missions like this where the plane is in flight for >36 hours. It has a toilet, microwave and a cot for the pilots to use during the more mundane parts of the mission.
No real secret sauce, the weapon weighs almost 30,000lbs and most of it is just hardened metal to make it heavy. The warhead is only ~5,300lbs of explosive
The kinetics matter here. The B2 flies much higher than the C-130 which would aid the GBU-57 MOP (almost certainly used here) in it's ability to penetrate to maximum depth. 80% of the 15 ton weight of that bomb is just heavy metal to give it maximum energy as it borrows into the ground.
Also, each B2 can carry 2 MOPs making it a better platform than a C-130, and that isn't even taking the stealth of the platform into account
This was not from a browser plugin, this was from my system antivirus
I would be happy to be wrong on this one. But I've gotten two pretty convincing threat notifications when visiting the page from the Sentinel One antivirus platform saying that my msedge process had been compromised by a known exploit.
I'll try to get more details.
I should note, I do not believe the site is malicious, but i am worried about 3rd party compromise of the site without the owner's knowledge
Did anyone else's antivirus complain about an exploit on this page?
---EDIT---
I'm about 98% sure this blog has a browser hijack embedded in it targeted at windows+MSEDGE browsers that attempted to launch a malicious powershell script to covertly screen record the target machine
It's more design and more thinking upfront, which is something the development community has moved away from in the past ~20 years with the rise of agile development and open source.
I agree, but even smaller than thinking in agile is just a tight iteration loop when i'm exploring a design. My ADHD makes upfront design a challenge for me and I am personally much more effective starting with a sketch of what needs to be done and then iterating on it until I get a good result.
The loop of prompt->study->prompt->study... is disruptive to my inner loop for several reasons, but a big one is that the machine doesn't "think" like i do. So the solutions it scaffolds commonly make me say "huh?" and i have to change my thought process to interpet them and then study them for mistakes. My intution and iteration is, for the time being, more effective than this machine assited loop for the really "interesting" code i have to write.
But i will say that AI has been a big time saver for more mundane tasks, especially when I can say "use this example and apply it to the rest of this code/abstraction".
It looks like Coyote[0], which is used in azure, was an evolution of P# which was an evolution of P
[0]https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...
Microsoft has a flavor of this for .NET called Coyote[0]
Acutally it can be a lot more if you are talking about pause latency, I've seen >200x improvements on max pause time on some syntethic benchmarks