4 ms·
>mmap is a really nifty feature of modern operating systems ... for some definition of "modern".
by ImprobableTruth 4y ago
>mmap is a really nifty feature of modern operating systems
... for some definition of "modern".
- antonvs 4y agoDoes this mean DEC’s TOPS-20 from 1969 is a modern OS?
- gumby 4y agoMmap was the only way to do disk I/O in Multics — we’re talking about a design a decade earlier than that. (Also you’re thinking of TOPS-10 — TOPS-20 and TWENEX were developed in the 70s. But your heart is in the right place!
- koito17 4y agoI wonder how the author would label Windows' MapViewOfFile :)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- lionkor 4y agoyou dont get the devs who spend their day on twitter instead of writing code to read your thread if it doesnt mention "modern" at least once. /s Its quite obvious that the author "dumbs down" all the information for a very non-developer audience, so I assume that gives some leniency. If you tell people that we have had things like mmap() for decades, they may start asking too many questions about why every piece of software underperforms so horribly below what was possible decades ago. Bit of a rant, but I feel that we lose a little bit of potential every time a developer calls operator<< on a std::istream in a loop.
- chaxor 4y agoDevs of 2023: "why does this wheel have rubber on it? It needs to be more modern. Let's take away the rubber and add firecrackers in its place as a nice feature, so really pops and makes the experience more exciting"
- munk-a 4y agoThe same can be said of devs of 2010 and devs of 2000. There are constant innovations and trends in technology and there are also some very core, generally very old and extremely critical components in the technology stacks we all use - people will see that these components don't use "teh hotness" and assume it would work better with the paradigm that's in favor at the time. Sometimes these people are right, sometimes they're wrong - we shouldn't discourage questioning the status quo as, critically, sometimes these people are right - but it is important to be cautious with such changes since generally there are a lot of very precise decisions that have been carefully considered. However, one need not look any further than OpenSSH to see how very serious bugs can exist in "unimpeachable" software that everyone just assumes it's safe to use. This is, as an aside, the reason why I don't comment my code often (I personally dislike docblocks that do nothing but obvious explanations) - but whenever I think hard about a thing I always record it in a comment with the problem, my reasoning, and my rational for choosing the solution used... i.e. don't comment on the what, comment on the why.
- malux85 4y agoChesterton's fence, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chesterton%27s_fence https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chesterton%27s_fence You may consider removing the rubber only when you can adqueately explain to me why it is there
- CoolGuySteve 4y agoTo be fair I find it completely baffling that R, Pandas, and all sorts of other tools make it difficult or impossible to mmap a column to a dataframe. Instead you have to do backflips to load data that doesn't fit in RAM.
- verall 4y agoWhat's wrong with operator<< on std::istream?