On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 20:01 +, tony288 via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
>
[…]
> Now what I would like to know, how would I make this code more
> efficient? Which is basically the aim I'm trying to achieve.
>
> Any pointers would be really help full. Should I use
> concurrency/parallelism etc.
On Saturday, 22 August 2015 at 06:48:48 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
But one that Google are entirely happy to fully fund.
Yes, they have made Go fully supported on Google Cloud now, so I
think it is safe to say that Google management is backing Go
fully.
I'm kinda hoping for Go++...
On Fri, 2015-08-21 at 01:22 +, Nicholas Wilson via Digitalmars-d
-learn wrote:
>
[…]
> Keep in mind java may be using green threads as opposed to kernel
> threads.
> The equivalent in D is a Fiber.
I believe Java itself hasn't used green threads in an awful long time:
Threads are mapped to k
On Fri, 2015-08-21 at 10:47 +, via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Yes, Go has sacrificed some compute performance in favour of
> latency and convenience. They have also released GC improvement
> plans for 1.6:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kBx98ulj5V5M9Zdeamy7v6ofZXX3yPziA
> f0V27A64
On Saturday, 22 August 2015 at 02:12:41 UTC, BBasile wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 20:09:22 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I have four arrays of ints, each array representing a kind of
event associated with that int (they all map to the same
space). Each array might have the same number multi
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 20:09:22 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I have four arrays of ints, each array representing a kind of
event associated with that int (they all map to the same
space). Each array might have the same number multiple times
and each array will be of different length.
So I
Thanks!
I wouldn't have expected that about the memory. But I wonder how
much of that memory usage with Appender was just all the template
instantiations. I'll have to look into that when I get back.
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 22:39:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Not at a pc, so can't test right now, but does Appender work at
compile time? If not, does ~= still blow up CTFE memory usage
like it used to? Any other best practice / trick for building
strings in CTFE?
I did two experiments:
Not at a pc, so can't test right now, but does Appender work at
compile time? If not, does ~= still blow up CTFE memory usage
like it used to? Any other best practice / trick for building
strings in CTFE?
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 20:09:22 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I have four arrays of ints, each array representing a kind of
event associated with that int (they all map to the same
space). Each array might have the same number multiple times
and each array will be of different length.
So I
I have four arrays of ints, each array representing a kind of
event associated with that int (they all map to the same space).
Each array might have the same number multiple times and each
array will be of different length.
So I would like to plot the int line on x axis and show number of
ti
On 08/21/2015 08:51 AM, Red Frog wrote:
I know inserting into the middle of arrays isn't the most efficient
thing to do, but I have my reasons... I could increase the length by 1
and then shuffle all the values back one at a time... but I assume it'd
be better to rewrite the back half as a single
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 14:35:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 12:59:09 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
[...]
Wouldn't it be easier to have a library function that can empty
the mailbox immediately? It's a waste of time to have all items
in the mailbox crash against a wall, bef
On 8/21/15 12:31 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On 08/21/2015 12:22 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 15:00:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there a good posting somewhere that summarizes the current best
practices for making const-correct (ie works for all of
mutable/const/immutable
On 08/21/2015 12:22 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 15:00:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there a good posting somewhere that summarizes the current best
practices for making const-correct (ie works for all of
mutable/const/immutable) structs?
- mark methods const
- avoid ref
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 15:00:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there a good posting somewhere that summarizes the current
best practices for making const-correct (ie works for all of
mutable/const/immutable) structs?
- mark methods const
- avoid reference type fields
;)
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 15:00:04 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Is there a good posting somewhere that summarizes the current
best practices for making const-correct (ie works for all of
mutable/const/immutable) structs?
Prepare for pain.
I know inserting into the middle of arrays isn't the most
efficient thing to do, but I have my reasons... I could increase
the length by 1 and then shuffle all the values back one at a
time... but I assume it'd be better to rewrite the back half as a
single chunk?
I don't really know how to g
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 12:45:52 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:31:13 UTC, tony288 wrote:
So I wrong some code. But it seems the time to process a
shared struct & shared long is always the same. Regardless of
adding paddings.
Should it be different?
Hi
all thank
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 14:35:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 12:59:09 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 10:43:22 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:57:47 UTC, John Colvin
wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:25:57 UTC, Chris wrote
Is there a good posting somewhere that summarizes the current best
practices for making const-correct (ie works for all of
mutable/const/immutable) structs?
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 12:59:09 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 10:43:22 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:57:47 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:25:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
Is there a way to flush a thread's message box other th
Currently, -cov requires you to run the coverage-instrumented program in
the directory you compiled, so that it can find the source. Is there a
way to tell the instrumented program where the source is if you run it
in another directory? Alternatively, is there a way to specify the
output direct
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 10:43:22 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:57:47 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:25:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
Is there a way to flush a thread's message box other than
aborting the thread? MailBox is private:
https://github.c
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:31:13 UTC, tony288 wrote:
So I wrong some code. But it seems the time to process a shared
struct & shared long is always the same. Regardless of adding
paddings.
Should it be different?
Yes, Go has sacrificed some compute performance in favour of
latency and convenience. They have also released GC improvement
plans for 1.6:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kBx98ulj5V5M9Zdeamy7v6ofZXX3yPziAf0V27A64Mo/edit
It is rather obvious that a building a good concurrent GC is a
time
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:57:47 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 15:25:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
Is there a way to flush a thread's message box other than
aborting the thread? MailBox is private:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/blob/master/std/concurre
On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 02:44:50 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
On 8/21/2015 3:37 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:
Keep in mind that in D everything is thread-local by default!
:)
For shared resources use __gshared or shared (although I do
not know for
sure whether shared works or not).
Note: share
On 08/21/2015 01:49 AM, Tony wrote:
Why is it acceptable to specify main as returning void (in addition to
returning int)?
void in that context means automatically return 0 if main() exits
without exception and non-zero if it exits with exception.
Ali
https://medium.com/@robin.verlangen/billions-of-request-per-day-meet-go-1-5-362bfefa0911
We then started analyzing the behavior of our Go application. On
average the application spent ~ 2ms per request, which was great!
It gave us 98 milliseconds to spare for network overhead, SSL
handshake, D
Why is it acceptable to specify main as returning void (in
addition to returning int)?
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 21:15:36 UTC, anonymous2 wrote:
On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 21:11:07 UTC, anonymous wrote:
I severely limited the range of integer. I don't know off the
top of my head how large you can make it without hitting
overflow.
I removed the file writing, because I'm
32 matches
Mail list logo
