EdSchouten

I wish someone would design a CPU where pointers refer to individual bits instead of 8-bit bytes. Sure, most instructions may still enforce that pointers are multiples of 8, but that’s no different from how existing instructions may have alignment requirements. I fail to see how such a design would be any less efficient if executed properly.

I think it’s silly that we always need to jump through hoops to declare and interact with bitmaps. Why can’t I just write the following?

bool my_bitmap[1024];

In an ideal world C++ wouldn’t need template specialization to make vector<bool> efficient.

Sacrificing three extra bits in every pointer also wouldn’t really lead to exhaustion of the address space. Intel and ARM CPUs don’t offer a full 64-bit address space anyway.

A "free distribution service and an open-access archive for nearly 2.4 million scholarly articles in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics."

No, in this case I have no interest in pursuing that.

Two months ago I decided to upload my very first paper to arxiv.org. As I'm not associated with any research institute, the process has been pretty painful. First I had to get endorsed by someone else to be able to submit a paper to a specific category (cs.DC in my case). After getting that sorted out I was able to upload. However, my submission has been "on hold" ever since.

I really wish arxiv.org provided a bit more transparency here. Why is my submission "on hold"? How many submissions are in front of me? What's the ETA?

The time complexities given in this article would be easier to read if they used |V| and |E| instead of m and n.

Interesting that it doesn’t use the same open source license as Vorbis/Opus itself. Otherwise improvements like these could be upstreamed?

> How does the monitoring system have any of the context to add labels? That would only exist in application memory.

Indeed. If you have a protocol that doesn’t allow exposing that kind of information, then that only lives in application memory. But my suggestion is that it’s exposed.

If I understand that correctly, it means your app always creates traces, and Grafana Cloud is responsible for sampling/aggregating. That may be prohibitively expensive in terms of CPU/network load.

What I’m suggesting is that your apps by default only send metrics to your monitoring system, but that the monitoring system can specifically ask to “upgrade” metrics to traces. Or to log entries.

The same thing with metric cardinality: by default, only report metrics in a fully aggregated manner. But do tell the monitoring system how they can potentially be broken up if needed (i.e., which labels to add).

What always puzzles me about OpenTelemetry is that tracing, metrics and logs are all designed independently. I wish there was a way I could just annotate my code base once, and let the ultimate decision to expose something as a metric/log/trace be dynamic at runtime.

For example, if I look at a graph in monitoring dashboard and see something suspicious, I’d like to say: “The next time something like this occurs again, please save me a trace.” I should be able to just do that with a single mouse click.

I remember them releasing the tracing spec/SDKs and saying “now let’s move on to metrics/logs.” That never sat right with me.

Go is often thought of as a successor of C. C doesn't have methods, only global functions. From my perspective, Go added methods primarily so that you can use them in combination with interfaces. Given that interfaces don't support generic methods, I'm personally not convinced that this feature was worth adding.

> For the mathematicians that created Computation Science, the only interesting solutions are complete solutions to general questions

There is a bunch of research devoted to Polynomial Time Approximation Schemes (PTAS). Mathematicians also take part in it.

Yeah, that Sudoku puzzle has multiple valid solutions, whereas the page only seems to accept a single one.

It looks like the code of the course was 2WC16. Unfortunately the course material no longer seems to be available online.