A common and reliable pattern in service unit files is thus:
NoNewPrivileges=yes
PrivateTmp=yes
PrivateDevices=yes
DevicePolicy=closed
ProtectSystem=strict
{ config, lib, pkgs, ...}: | |
with lib; | |
let | |
cfg = config.services.batteryNotifier; | |
in { | |
options = { | |
services.batteryNotifier = { | |
enable = mkOption { |
This gist demonstrates a trick I came up with which is defining
IsString
for Q (TExp a)
, where a
is lift
-able. This allows you
to write $$("...")
and have the string parsed at compile-time.
On GHC 9, you are able to write $$"..."
instead.
This offers a light-weight way to enforce compile-time constraints. It's
basically OverloadedStrings
with static checks. The inferred return type
I'm going to do something that I don't normally do, which is to say I'm going to talk about comparative benchmarks. In general, I try to confine performance discussion to absolute metrics as much as possible, or comparisons to other well-defined neutral reference points. This is precisely why Cats Effect's readme mentions a comparison to a fixed thread pool, rather doing comparisons with other asynchronous runtimes like Akka or ZIO. Comparisons in general devolve very quickly into emotional marketing.
But, just once, today we're going to talk about the emotional marketing. In particular, we're going to look at Cats Effect 3 and ZIO 2. Now, for context, as of this writing ZIO 2 has released their first milestone; they have not released a final 2.0 version. This implies straight off the bat that we're comparing apples to oranges a bit, since Cats Effect 3 has been out and in production for months. However, there has been a post going around which cites various compar