Software, performance, optimization, programming languages, security, open source, #CarbonLang lead, #LLVM, #Clang, C++. 🏳️‍🌈 he / they

San Jose, CA
Joined November 2011
Was *just* in Aspen (but sadly for a bit too long and so minimizing other travel). But CO is easy to get to some time? And I know Jen Engel would probably like to sync up....
1
1
FWIW, I'm game. When? Where? And most importantly, what do y'all like best in the wine dept? ;] (I'm in the SF bay area, so that's easiest, but I'm willing to travel with wine for a good cause.)
1
1
I am *intensely* curious about this particular debate. We need a live version. I can supply wine. ;]
1
5
Replying to @basit_ayantunde
Can only speak to LLVM & Clang, but there the automatic vectorization systems don't (AFAIK) know how to synthesize masks to handle partial stores. Both loop and scalar vectorization are pretty limited in their power currently. There is active work redesigning and expanding both.
1
1
8
Replying to @CppSage
The specific goal is to represent the large body of types which have a viable idempotent state for destructors. As for how multiple destruction comes up, some of it may be in the proposal. My memory is that it is only about reducing cost -- specifically dynamic tracking.
The PDF paper it links to explicitly discusses Carbon. More importantly, this post and paper are about *today*. Carbon is an experiment for the future. I *hope* that Carbon lets movement to mem safety be more incremental than current options, but we need to prove that out.
1
Replying to @TartanLlama
@HaskRay seems like a good candidate to help...
1
1
1. The New York Times has published a 4,500 word opinion piece by Pamela Paul targeting transgender care. It is filled with inaccuracies, faulty citations, and factually incorrect claims. Lets dive in. Subscribe to support my work.
Would it still feel reasonable with a variadics-style expansion or as mentioned in another comment an explicit splat? To me, it seems good to surface that the arity isn't 1 given how pervasive that is (even if it shouldn't be).
3
1
I still call it Twitter. Don't fall for bad comparisons to dead naming a human being. A corporation is not a human being, no matter what citizens united or the Supreme Court try to tell you. There's no rule anywhere that says that I have to play along with the terrible rebrand.
This tweet is unavailable
To address #3, you need fundamental new language features or semantic models. For example, to make lifetimes safe with adequate expressivity needs GC, a borrow checker, or [some other tech]. And all three, especially combined, require an evolution path beyond backwards compat.