HippoBaro

.NET Core 2.0 wasn't an LTS release like 1.1 and 2.1. See https://www.microsoft.com/net/platform/support-policy

My thought exactly. If there is a `vibrant free web`, I can't see it.

This is arguably not C++ interoperability, but C interop. Big difference there. The author conveniently doesn't show how to pass parameters (especially non-POCO objects), for example.

This is such a great, inventive idea. Would definitely like to have something akin to that as a screensaver, for example.

Woudn't anyone really into IP latency optimization be using something like DPDK on Linux? If you want high-performance networking, then using the kernel isn't the best idea IMO.

Yes, but it's also important to understand what you lose when using these better-performing hashtables. First thing that comes to mind is that when performing a successful lookup on a std::unordered_map, the reference is guarrantied to be valid until either (a) you erase that element or (b) the table itself is destroyed. Almost all faster hashtables around give up that properties for better lookup performance. Any insert operation might break all references.

So, in a sense, it's a bit unfair because std::unordered_map, in a real-world scenario, will potentially require you to perform less lookup because you can cache the references. With the others, you can't.

std::optional is designed for value semantic. It wouldn't make sense to use it to return a pointer-type.

I was 16 when I first read Spinoza's Ethics. I didn't understand much by then, what I did though radically changed my conception of the world. It's not an easy philosophy. It creates havoc in our conception of human society. No free-will, thus no sin nor merit, for example.

Spinoza is also a great philosopher for people not used to the "canonical" philosophical methodology. The treaty looks and works like a formal mathematical proof with definitions, axioms, and propositions systematically proved by pure logic.

Doesn't AGPL allow commercial use?

My thought exactly. Would be interesting to know if they did and if yes, why they chose to develop something in-house anyway.

Now that's innovation.

I think Naples will be a very serious threat to Intel in the server market. As Ryzen benchmarks & reviews have shown, Zen really shines in heavy-multithreaded applications. The typical workload of a server.

Though I am kind of worried concerning memory access. Latency penalties when accessing non-local memory are very high on Zen CPUs due to the multi-die architecture design.

Does that mean we will finally see some serious interest in Shared-Nothing design and alike in the future ?