pixor vincent-picaud

Edit: This list is now maintained in the rust-anthology repo.

Introduction
Ownership
- Where Rust Really Shines
- Rust Means Never Having to Close a Socket
The Problem with Single-threaded Shared Mutability

Problem

Bulk Download of Recordings and Gallery items

Solution

Write a simple script

How to use the script

Login to mi cloud https://i.mi.com
Navigate to https://us.i.mi.com/#record or https://us.i.mi.com/v1#gallery
In web browser (Chrome) press F12 to open Chrome developer tool

Why COW was deemed ungood for std::string.

COW, short for copy on write, is a way to implement mutable strings so that creating strings and logically copying strings, is reduced to almost nothing; conceptually they become free operations like no-ops.

Basic idea: to share a data buffer among string instances, and only make a copy for a specific instance (the copy on write) when that instance's data is modified. The general cost of this is only an extra indirection for accessing the value of a string, so a COW implementation is highly desirable. And so the original C++ standard, C++98, and its correction C++03, had special support for COW implementations, and e.g. the g++ compiler's std::string implementations used COW.

So why was that support dropped in C++11?

In particular, would the same reason or reasons apply to a reference counted immutable string value class?

13 valuable things I learned using CMake

Author : Dua Guillaume
Date : 04-26-2020

Requirement : A first experience with CMake

Intro

As a modern C++ specialist, my job is to focus on software development, from a performance and quality perspective.

Concept-based polymorphism in modern C++


Date	05-05-2021 - 10-17-2023
Revision	R3
Author	Guillaume Dua
Reviewers	Loïc Joly, Antoine Morrier

Meeting Cpp 2021 - Trip report


Author	Guillaume Dua
Date	10/11/2021 - 12/11/2021

	#include <iostream>
	#include <cmath>

	// Sample of an optimizer bug in Visual Studio 2003 - 2019 (or more)
	//
	// Compiling this program in Release (/O1, /O2 or /Ox and LTCG) in both x86 and x64
	// configurations produces a different output from unoptimized (Debug) configurations.
	//
	// Expected output: 709
	// Produced output: 31

	using Soss
	using ZigZagBoomerang
	using Soss: logdensity, xform, ConditionalModel
	using ForwardDiff
	using ForwardDiff: gradient!
	using LinearAlgebra
	using SparseArrays
	using StructArrays
	using TransformVariables
	using MeasureTheory

	using StaticCompiler, StaticTools, StaticMPI, MPICH_jll

	function mpihello(argc, argv)
	MPI_Init(argc, argv)

	comm = MPI_COMM_WORLD
	world_size, world_rank = MPI_Comm_size(comm), MPI_Comm_rank(comm)

	printf((c"Hello from ", world_rank, c" of ", world_size, c" processors!\n"))
	MPI_Finalize()