huntrss

I ask the most important question:

Which Linux Distribution are you gonna use?

And before you answer: There are wrong answers 🤪

Thanks for the explanation.

That's a good and relatable Arch Linux meme.

Maybe yes maybe no.

I still don't envy a situation in television that is so unreal like a prince (or something similar) dancing with his dream woman (I assume). It's so surreal tgat I can't take it serious and can't envy it.

Her life is normal. The depiction on the television is fiction. No reason to be envious

Thanks

Hi, thanks for your post. Can you provide links to the projects so that I can check them out more closely?

At least it's still original taste ...

It's so human how - instead of admitting its error - it's pulling this bs right out of its ass 🤣

Thanks for the clarification. This is especially true for libraries that can benefit from async.

I think the article is ok, and yes I read it ;)

I think the title is unnecessary click-baity, because there are some relevant truths to it.

Most relevant truth us, that a lot of applications won't need async since they are not large enough, not IO bound etc..

I think one of the misconceptions in this article is, that the author arguments that you need to be an Amazon or google to benefit from async. This is not completely wrong but, as a software developer in the embedded system industry that I am, I must say it is also very relevant for embedded systems.

If someone read the article and is unsure about async, I can recommend these two articles that provide insights "from the other side" these means devs that actually find async relevant and beneficial:

https://notgull.net/why-you-want-async/

https://without.boats/blog/why-async-rust/ The article from boats is absolutely worth it. Even if you are an async sceptic.

Finally regarding the introduction of async APIs and abstractions into any code base:

Creating an async application or sync application is an architectural decision. And since architecture is the sum of all decisions that are hard to change (I think this is from Martin Fowler) thus decision - async or sync - is hard to change and one must live with it.

Yes, there are languages like Go or Erlang that resolve this async vs. sync problem, they come at a cost (having a runtime, at least Go has one afaik, I no nothing about Erlang). And choosing a particular language is also an architectural decision and hence hard to change.

I found this article also very interesting: https://extremelearning.com.au/unreasonable-effectiveness-of-quasirandom-sequences/

It focusses more or less on one sequence but provides use cases and in-depth knowledge