3 ms·

It's not difficult being in the top 5-10 inside the lower league. So I'd bet on "he is delusional". When .NET gets a proper M:N parallel runtime it's when they

It's not difficult being in the top 5-10 inside the lower league. So I'd bet on "he is delusional". When .NET gets a proper M:N parallel runtime it's when they will even enter the competition. They are not even in it right now. Golang is miles ahead of .NET and it's far from many people's favorite tech.

Xeamek 3y ago
They won't because they already have async/await
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Good, they have the first 3% covered. It's a start.
martindevans 3y ago
There was a "green thread" experiment for dotnet a while ago, here is the conclusion: https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/2398 https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/2398
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Yeah, I saw that some time ago. Their conclusion is basically: "it's hard to integrate with the current ecosystem so we're giving up".
- neonsunset 3y ago
  He doesn’t want to read all the research text, especially if it debunks his assertions. Your effort, although appreciated, is wasted on this kind of person.
  - pdimitar 3y ago
    I've read it. It was not impressive. They prioritized backwards compatibility which is of course their prerogative. But that's not how you progress. Having proper M:N parallel runtime is mandatory these days and it baffles me that there people who are still not sold on it. I take it they have jobs and tasks where it isn't necessary but it's an interesting question to ask: for how long?
neonsunset 3y ago
Ah, the function colouring group of people. That’s how we know you never bothered to try to actually get good at programming.
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Are you lost on your way to Reddit? Hardly a productive comment. While mine was a bit tongue-in-cheek and apparently stung several people, it also has facts behind it. Working on many super-parallel tasks like, you know, good old web apps and APIs, have shown me that using regular threads does not scale. There is tech out there that solves these problems and many C# and Java devs come off as grumpy curmudgeons instead of being proper techies and engaging arguments on their merit. And you seem to be another example. Do better. The metrics and numbers are out there on the internet clearly showing that M:N parallel runtimes beat the classic threading model. That you might have chosen not to look for them is not a rebuttal by itself.
  - neonsunset 3y ago
    You do realize that all these are about multiplexing multiple logical threads of execution on top of few physical threads of the executor? Getting this wrong alongside the Java argument (because Java retrofitted green threads - it could not adopt async/await, pushing it away from the scenarios .NET is already good at) does show me that you neither know how modern async runtimes are implemented nor understand the meaning behind the keywords repeated in every message.
    - pdimitar 3y ago
      > You do realize that all these are about multiplexing multiple logical threads of execution on top of few physical threads of the executor? I do, which makes the rest of your comment a very boring ad-hominem. I never said anything about how is the async runtime implemented. The problem is having certain runtime facilities, not the how below.

Xeamek 3y ago

They won't because they already have async/await

pdimitar 3y ago
Good, they have the first 3% covered. It's a start.

martindevans 3y ago

There was a "green thread" experiment for dotnet a while ago, here is the conclusion: https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/2398 https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/2398

pdimitar 3y ago
Yeah, I saw that some time ago. Their conclusion is basically: "it's hard to integrate with the current ecosystem so we're giving up".
neonsunset 3y ago
He doesn’t want to read all the research text, especially if it debunks his assertions. Your effort, although appreciated, is wasted on this kind of person.
- pdimitar 3y ago
  I've read it. It was not impressive. They prioritized backwards compatibility which is of course their prerogative. But that's not how you progress. Having proper M:N parallel runtime is mandatory these days and it baffles me that there people who are still not sold on it. I take it they have jobs and tasks where it isn't necessary but it's an interesting question to ask: for how long?

neonsunset 3y ago

Ah, the function colouring group of people. That’s how we know you never bothered to try to actually get good at programming.

pdimitar 3y ago
Are you lost on your way to Reddit? Hardly a productive comment. While mine was a bit tongue-in-cheek and apparently stung several people, it also has facts behind it. Working on many super-parallel tasks like, you know, good old web apps and APIs, have shown me that using regular threads does not scale. There is tech out there that solves these problems and many C# and Java devs come off as grumpy curmudgeons instead of being proper techies and engaging arguments on their merit. And you seem to be another example. Do better. The metrics and numbers are out there on the internet clearly showing that M:N parallel runtimes beat the classic threading model. That you might have chosen not to look for them is not a rebuttal by itself.
- neonsunset 3y ago
  You do realize that all these are about multiplexing multiple logical threads of execution on top of few physical threads of the executor? Getting this wrong alongside the Java argument (because Java retrofitted green threads - it could not adopt async/await, pushing it away from the scenarios .NET is already good at) does show me that you neither know how modern async runtimes are implemented nor understand the meaning behind the keywords repeated in every message.
  - pdimitar 3y ago
    > You do realize that all these are about multiplexing multiple logical threads of execution on top of few physical threads of the executor? I do, which makes the rest of your comment a very boring ad-hominem. I never said anything about how is the async runtime implemented. The problem is having certain runtime facilities, not the how below.