936 karma · joined August 27, 2012
I've been wondering about this for a project of mine. If one goes for an AGPL license but offers a commercial license for those that can't comply then a CLA is necessary from any contributors.
Policy support for EV adoption has been woefully poor and inconsistent (you could generally say this about most things from the government at the moment...).
It's hard to make investment decisions around EV infrastructure when the government keeps changing their plans every leader.
What you're saying is you want them to continue maintaining it at their cost because the community don't want to?
These kinds of open source projects need to be sustainable, you can't expect the companies producing them to continue maintaining and investing in them without some sustainable way of doing it.
I don't see why project maintainers gets called out on this but AWS reselling open source projects whilst contributing very little to them isn't.
First laptop clearly had no QC and instead of offering to swap it, the expectation was we would do some pretty tricky repairs to a brand new laptop. We sent that one back but the return just sat there for weeks without being processed before a post on the forums got it moving.
The other laptop refused to boot after eighteen months (still under the two year EU warranty) but involved about twenty back and forward emails to support - half of which ignored diagnoses we had already done and provided the results for.
I love the hardware but I just don't think I can recommend people buy one at the moment, which is a real shame.
49% kicks in at £55k at combined NI and Income.
(This all ignores the 14% that's hidden on the employer side)
Many people have been struggling to reproduce the benchmark numbers included in the original llama paper.
On balance though, I would probably give them another go when this needs an upgrade.
Really wanted to keep it but it arrived with a litany of quality control issues. Most of those are probably fixable with replacement parts but I don't think there's anything that can be done about the screen wobble.
A laptop I can't actually use on my lap..
"Increments and decrements happen once and at a predictable time. The GC is running all the time and traversing the universe of GC objects. Probably with bad locality, polluting the cache, etc."
This is only the case with a mark-sweep collector, usually most of your allocations die young in the nursery. With reference counting you pay the counting cost for everything.
"In object-oriented languages, where you can literally have a pointer to something, you simply mark a reference as a weak reference if it might create a cycle."
As someone who has tried to identify memory leaks in production where someone has forgotten to "simply" mark a reference in some deep object graph as weak, this is naive.
"With an 8-byte counter you will never overflow. So...you know...just expand up to 8-bytes as needed? Usually you can get by with a few bits."
So now my "about as minimal as you can get short of nothing at all" check as an unpredictable branch in it?
"If you must overflow, e.g., you cannot afford an 8-byte counter and you need to overflow a 4-byte counter with billions of references, if you can copy it, you create a shallow copy."
I don't even know where to begin with this.
"If GC is so good, why wouldn't Python just garbage collect everything, which they already did once and could trivially do, instead of going through the hassle of implementing reference counting for everything but the one case I mentioned?"
This probably has more to do with finalising resources and deterministic destruction than anything else.
--
Anyone who is interested in actually studying this area would probably find https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse590p/05au/p50-b... interesting. Also https://gchandbook.org/