Same here. I thought that's pretty normal. The generic one looks pretty...normal to me. The clang version iss too much compiler voodoo and kinda makes it less readable.
Back when MOSA got created, we were aiming for a pure approach.
For example, we were trying to use as few intrinsics as possible and a mostly architecture agnostic approach.
Furthermore we also focussed on Mono compatibility (that was way before CoreCLR came out).
The data does show that women led companies do better- but the fact that there are so few women who have to fight to make it to the top could mean that the women who get there are better- not that women in general do better.
I'm just wondering how the same statement (if the data would show it) would be perceived if it would be said for males.
Studies could also show that there is a higher chance for mothers to quit along half the way due to child-related reasons (made up studies for the sake of argument). That on the other hand would be considered misogny.
And I'd take it with a grain of salt as the sample sizes are vastly different.
That being said, do you have a link somewhere? Would really be interested to read that.
Wow, they didn't have SSA in there yet? That's quite a surprise as, as far as I understand, SSA is pretty common nowadays in compiler techniques. Even for the MOSA compiler we had this.
Really? Last time I checked it still didn't work. Will have to try when I get home.
The problem was that the config is compiled into a dynamic library and gets passed the config struct. The old alloc method kind of died on me when the dynamic library was trying to alter that struct. So I had to enable jemalloc to keep it from crashing.
Hmm. Yeah, I mean, jemalloc is the default allocator, so something must be wonky here. You don't need to explicitly use jemalloc. That's what you get by default.
Quite the opposite; jemalloc has been the default, and using the system allocator has been the "hassle" since well before 1.0.
However a few key platforms have jemalloc disabled because it's buggy (deadlocks or worse). I think as of a few days ago it's pretty much universally off on windows.
Also whether jemalloc is used depends on how you build your thing -- dylibs use the system allocator (because they're subordinate), static libs (rlibs) inherit from the thing they're linked into, and executables use jemalloc (because they're in control).
Type Erasure is the reason you can't use builtin types as generic arguments. And in a lot of cases it forces you to cast.
And as type erasure happens very, very early in the compilation process, you lose a lot of static type information the compiler could act on or give you warnings.
No it wasn't necessary to maintain backwards compatibility. Type erasure was implemented to allow libraries to upgrade to generics without breaking compatibility with existing applications.
I heard once that the book originally lacked many footnotes and they were added later after an outcry from the scientific community. I don't know if that's true but I can believe it.
Like I said the subject area is fascinating and merits a much warmer reception than this book got. Tragic.
Same here. I couldn't care less about Hamlet or other works by Shakespeare. And I cannot recall any of my other friends having _any_ tendency towards Hamlet at all.
I started to care about the stuff we read in school in my early thirties (Shakespeare would be an exception, for ... reasons).
There's a special exception for Max Frisch which I discovered mid-twenties and was very thankful I did not have to read it in school.
So, well, the "why" is: maybe later in your life.
(There's another "why" in "you an your friends aren't necessarily representative for Germany as a whole, bit that would have been a rather cheap comment)
