nu11ptr

17 ms·

121.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
It depends on workload. It is difficult to quantify the trade offs without knowing that. The problem is in languages like C#/Java almost everything is an allocation, so I don't really think reference counting would work well there
122.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
> It does make me wonder: How practical is it to just use traditional reference counting and then periodically do a mark-and-sweep? I know it's a very different approach than .net was designed for. (Because they deliberately decided
123.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I don't generally find them low quality, but I do wish people wouldn't use it since I don't subscribe to it.
124.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Even worse: they don't explain what the DATAS acronym means. Seems like the author makes too many assumptions about the knowledge base of their reader IMO.
125.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
> Does this use an external binary or CGO or Wazero (Wasm) or is it rewritten in Go? Since Postgres is always a network connection, I don't believe any CGo is required. > I try to avoid CGO if I can because it adds compile-time c
126.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Yes, but it embeds it in your executable so it is transparent to the end user. UPDATE: Actually, I see it is downloaded (and I think cached?). I can't recall if you can embed as an option or not.
127.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
You can, just embed it in your Go app: https://github.com/fergusstrange/embedded-postgres
128.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Is this WASM specific though? Some apps suffer in performance when they move to 64-bit in general due to larger pointers and not taking sufficient advantage of/or needing 64-bit data types in general, hence the increased memory bandwid
129.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Should have (2018) call out
130.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I have traveled a fair amount via Amtrak, and in general, I don't really like their newer cars. The old ones were fabric, huge bathrooms, spacious and comfy. The double decker ones had a feeling like you were almost in a traveling apar
131.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I'm not so much cherry picking as I am specifically talking compute (not I/O,stdlib) performance. However, when measured for general purpose tasks, that would involve compute and things like I/O, stdlib performance, etc., Pyt
132.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
First, we need to add the word 'only': "not ONLY because it’s interpreted, but because its dynamic contract must be honored." Interpreted languages are slow by design. This isn't bad, it just is a fact. Second, at m
133.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I would argue this isn't true. It is a big part of what makes it slow. The fastest interpreted languages are one to two orders of magnitude slower than for example C/C++/Rust. If your language does math 20-100 times slower th
134.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
The primary focus here is good and something I hadn't considered: python memory being so dynamic leads to poor cache locality. Makes sense. I will leave that to others to dig into. That aside, I was expecting some level of a pedantic a
135.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Everything said is true without AI as well, at least for me. I don't hate Python, and I like it for very small scripts, but for large programs the lack of static type makes it much to brittle IMO. Static typing gives the confidence tha
136.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
And that leads to dependency hell once you realize that those dependencies all need different versions of the same crate. Most of the time this "just works" (at the cost of more dependencies, longer compile time, bigger binary)...
137.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
...and that sounds nice to me as well, but if I never get far enough to give it to my users then what good is fast binaries? (implying that I quit, not that Rust can't deliver). The holy grail would be to have both. Go is generally &#x
138.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
This is interesting. It got me to think. I like it when articles provoke me to think a bit more on a subject. I have found this true for myself as well. I changed back over to Go from Rust mostly for the iteration speed benefits. I would re
139.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
> To this day, Java applications are the slowest and most memory hungry long-running server applications by far I am not a fan of Java, but the slow part is just plain wrong. On properly sized hardware Java is blisteringly fast. Did it e
140.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Question: Years ago, back when I used to do networking, Cisco Wireless controllers used 1.1.1.1 internally. They seemed to literally blackhole any comms to that IP in my testing. I assume they changed this when 1.0.0.0/8 started routin
141.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Am I the only one who read this as the terminal program "screen" (the terminal multiplexer)?
142.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I/O strikes me as one place where dynamic dispatch overhead would likely be negligible in practice. Obviously it depends on the I/O target and would need to be measured, but they don't call them "I/O bound" (as
143.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
What would you use in its place? I've never had an issue with it. I use it for 1) early termination 2) carrying custom request metadata. I don't really think it is fully the coloring problem because you can easily call non-context
144.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Perhaps a dumb question, but is the only way to use grok 4 for now via grok.com? Only via paid? No way to try it out for free, correct?
145.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I don't worry about security too much given it is just bound to localhost, but I do use a simple password (and make it modifiable by the user). Avoiding port collisions in the real world isn't a big issue, just ask an AI for the l
146.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Performance is relative. gRPC is plenty fast enough for my use case, and for that matter, almost all client/server use cases that work across the Internet. If a Javascript web client against a REST backend is fast enough latency-wise,
147.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
I actually use this currently. Not nearly as many platforms, but you an always fallback to gRPC.
148.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Which platforms? My product runs gRPC client/server on macOS, Linux and Windows. No issues with privileges. Or are you trying to run it on port 443? Yeah, don't do that, run it on 8443 or whatever instead.
149.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
Have you considered just using gRPC in this case? You gain 100% language separation (no FFI) and remote client/server at the cost of a little more call overhead.
150.
by nu11ptr 1y ago
That is my understanding. It lets you bypass CGo overhead, but I'd be lying if I said I fully understood it.

More ›