Can anyone explain why there is such a huge difference in some of the benchmarks: Poll, Forking, CPU Cache, Semaphores, Socket Activity, Context Switching (all Stress-NG). Can we really trust these tests?
cmeerw
joined 1 year ago
13
Pulling a single item from a C++ parameter pack by its index - The Old New Thing
(devblogs.microsoft.com)
Depends on what semantic you want. Sure, if you use a unique_ptr member, you will get a deleted copy constructor/operator - I wouldn't consider that blowing up in my face.
And even the presented fix hurts my eyes. Should have used a unique_ptr or optional.
Yes, it's not Open Source, but I am not sure that's really relevant here. I see it more as a prototype implementation for something that could be standardised for C++.
The linked tweet links to the recording, but it has apparently also been uploaded to YouTube: https://youtu.be/5Q1awoAwBgQ
Also the location of known Wifi networks.
Embracing the GC
I never actually liked the GC in D as it didn't seem to fit in with the general direction of the language, and Walter Bright in D at 20: Hits and Misses says:
Miss: Emphasis on GC
There is also lowendspirit, but in both cases you have to be very careful what you buy - not everything that is advertised there will work as advertised or will work long-term
where they will double your monthly data limit for free when you comment your order number.
where they use you to spam the forum thread (for giving away something rarely anyone has any use for)
So they actually rewrote The Hurd in Rust.
Prepare for a humongous inrush of spam before servers patch this one.
But it's already patched by GMX and Microsoft.
As far as I understand it, it doesn't affect single mail servers, but only mail systems where you have separate inbound and outbound servers and the outbound servers trust the data they get from the inbound servers.
view more: next ›
You mean, don't trust a flatpak uploaded by a random person, but if there are enough fake reviews, it can be trusted?