runevault

ORMs are so incredibly finicky. I still remember using old Linq-to-SQL (not Entity Framework) and I had to write the linq query in the reverse order of what I expected or it created 3 nested subqueries instead of just joining the tables together. That was when I learned to instantly double check every ORM query I wrote.

Sadly the era of government that split up studios and theaters is long gone. Hollywood is built on a different time between things like this and its flavor of unions that cover the biggest players in the industry.

Closest thing we have to a Hollywood today is games, but game makers can also make consoles and industry wide unions would never happen. Is there some unionization in games? Yeah, but I haven't heard of any single one that cover a significant number of different studios

Not really. Lore is for gamedev at companies and so not a distributed VCS. Using it for an open source project if you allow outside PRs makes no sense.

Stripe did such a good job with this book (and the others I bought that they published). Each one feels like an artifact I can show off on top of having interesting information inside.

So you're assuming game devs write every line of code in their server infrastructure. First, could be using a third party library you have license to use on a limited number of machines that make up your backend servers. Second you could be paying for third party API access to something like snowflake.

You either have to rip out the code (which may or may not break the server, but still requires developer time to do) or write replacement code which likely takes even more dev time to do or you would have done it instead of paying for the library/access to the service.

Elevator pitch for the language itself or a library/library ecosystem that lets you do things better than in other languages. Ruby originally blew up because Rails was a way people enjoyed writing backend code, despite the speed issues. But the problem is other languages got good enough at writing back ends Ruby was no longer special there and didn't have anything else to back it up the way Python has such strong control of the ML library ecosystem.

It is interesting seeing more and more GCed ecosystems become aggressive about allowing code to stack allocate more. Watching dotnet go through it since I think Core 2.1, or whenever they introduced Span<T>, Memory<T>, etc to get significant performance gains has been nice to track.

GCed languages do not have to be slow if you keep the garbage to only where it is necessary (or where you can allocate once and never collect).

The version I've always heard is just well designed but less popular languages, but the ones I can think of were all functional (Haskell/F#/OCaml/Clojure/Elm/Erlang)

If nothing else dotnet has TCO IL operations (C# doesn't compile down to them last I knew but F# does) so in theory shouldn't be hard to add.

AOT vs JIT is always interesting since JIT depends on the runtime actually deciding to bother running the later passes to get more optimized code.

And sorry for the paranoia, I find a lot of people tried f# or even c# back in 4.x Framework era and think it hasn't changed.

Out of curiosity when did you write that interpreter? The entire dotnet ecosystem has seen massive speed improvements over the years, particularly for anyone who last tried them during the Framework era. Hell they even put work in to improving tail calls which the c# compiler doesn't even take advantage of (also either in the dotnet 9 or 10 timeframe f# added an attribute to make it so a recursive call that isn't a tail call throws a compiler error so you can't accidentally screw that up).

I don't know that any open source project will ever compete with Unreal and its high end tech targeting the AAA space. But beyond that, Raylib doesn't give a ton of things an engine does because that is not the point of a library like it. This is to let someone build their own engine how they want, Unreal/Unity/Godot/etc let you give up some control and decision options to skip a ton of work building out a lot of basic features.

The thing that is funny about it is at least with the mixes, it does actively make me engage less because there are videos I would click on if they were not being tied into a mix, but because they are I actively choose not to open the video and let the song play.

It really amazes how how Youtube refuses to let me hide stuff I don't want to see on my homepage. I still long for the ability to tell them to not give me mix playlists, I do not want them, and often they annoy me when the first song is one I'd click on but I don't want to have to pay attention enough to kill it before the next song plays (since you cannot disable play next in playlists...)