1,113 karma · joined July 29, 2016
Husband and Father. More @ https://rockwotj.com
tbh for silly benchmarks like this it will ultimately be hard to beat a language that compiles to machine code, due to jit warmup etc.
It’s hard to due benchmarks right, for example are you testing IO performance? are OS caches flushed between language runs? What kind of disk is used etc? Performance does not exist in a vacuum of just the language or algorithm.
Reminds me of the WAND vs MAXSCORE discussion by turbopuffer: https://turbopuffer.com/blog/fts-v2-maxscore
I have read the gemini source and it’s a pretty simple prompt to summarize everything when the context window is full
1: https://github.com/google/leveldb
Not true, you still need fsync in direct I/O to ensure durability in power loss situations. Some drives have write caches that means acknowledged writes live in non-volatile memory. So maybe the perf is wildly better because you’re sacrificing durability?
https://github.com/aherrmann/rules_zig
Real world projects like ZML uses it:
We also have an dockerfile for clang/LLVM in that repo so the whole thing is hermetic. It’s a bit of shame Bazel doesn’t come with stronger options/defaults here, because I feel like I want to reproduce this same toolchain on every C++ project with Bazel
You mean codepoints or maybe grapheme clusters?
Anyways yeah it’s a little more complicated but the principle of being able to truncate a string without splitting a codepoint in O(1) is still useful
The delivery guarantees section alone doesn’t make me trust it. You can do at least once or at most once with kafka. Exactly once is mostly a lie, it depends on the downstream system: unless going back to the same system, the best you can do is at least once with idempotancy
https://blog.superhuman.com/delightful-search-more-than-meet...