mxz3000

If the compiler can prove there isn't action-at-a-distance between those lines (this might be non-trivial), then can't the destructor be called before running bar ? Does the C++ spec necessarily say that destructors are called at the end of the block, compared to, let's say, as soon as the variable is no longer used?

For the experts in this thread: is there any benefit to using these so called array languages compared to using something like numpy (or even pandas/polars) ?

renders fine on my 4y old android phone

why didn't you just get Amazon to refund you for the defective product?

mostly yes, at $work we're trying to move away from pandas entirely in favour of polars. Polars is mostly faster, with an API that's actually sane and makes sense. No reason to use pandas nowadays.

hindsight is 20/20.

Don't criticise people for making certain decisions years ago when those don't match what you'd choose to do now. Often you'll find that they were very reasonable given the constraints at the time.

Also the spec will have evolved over time with changes that would have been made under constraint of the existing system, which tends to produce things that are not as nice compared to something that was designed from the get-go to support the features. This is something that's seen very often in software engineering, and are probably partly a reason why long-lived codebases tend to be dumpster fires in general.

Calling them 'very biased and not very smart' is not very constructive.

That's not to say that the wheel format isn't a dumpster fire (I'll have to take your word on that), or hasn't morphed into one with time & revisions.

I would expect most people to read code in their IDEs, where small amounts of type inference like this is fine because the IDE tells you what the type is.

I agree that if you spend a lot of time reading code in something like GitHub, not having explicit types is annoying, but seriously, who does that?

I also believe that an IDE like Rider will complain that the IEnumerable returned by `.Select` is consumed multiple times.

if you have a reasonably good IDE you don't really need to explicitly compile the whole program outside of when you want to run it.

at work we use the ONNX serialisation format for all of our prod models. Those get loaded by the ONNX runtime for inference. works great.

perhaps it's be viable to add support for the ONNX format even for use cases like model checkpointing during training, etc ?

also means no autocomplete with the from bit first

we have a massive mixed c# and f# codebase at work.

F# is not magical. Yes it's an ML, but frankly, C# is better in every way, to the point we're slowly moving away from F# entirely.

The main reason is perf, it's really easy to shoot yourself in the foot with performance in c# (e.g. huge allocations, accidentally evaluating seqs twice, etc). Also IDE support for F# sucks when you get to the hundreds of project solutions like we have.

For side projects, sure use F#. For everything else, stick with C#.

Yeap, it's used as a case study for us as to the worst case scenario in trading incidents. Definitely humbling.

spamming the market with orders for one