What about SPAs tho? Some of the state is in the URL, and as the user fills the form, you might push state to undo last step of the form. Does this mean that in this context the user gets thrown to about:blank? That would break tons of websites.
Sure, but by the sound of the article, the compiler won't do the right thing?
Effectively, I'm a c++ novice, should I ever sprinkle move (under the constraints of the article)? Or will the compiler figure it out correctly for me and I can write my code without caring about this.
Do I really need care about this? I really hoped that I can just not bother wrapping things in std::move and let the compiler figure it out?
I.e. if I have
```
std::string a = "hi";
std::string b = "world";
return {a, b}; // std::pair
```
I always assumed the compiler figures out that it can move these things?
If not, why not?
My ide tells me I should move, surely the compiler has more context to figure that out?
I do want a setup like this, however, most of my development is on Windows which means license cost is usually higher than the cost of the VM. I could run vm's on my home machine, but even then I feel like the terminal experience is quite poor. You want to have a mobile native code, to check the code/read the plans. So far I have been using teamviewer to access my home desktop which works, albeit annoying to use, plus I don't have fancy notifications. Perhaps a web first approach with a mobile responsive web app would work, that shows the files of the project as well as the terminal.
The anti-cheat streams executable code into the client, and that code is mostly for detecting tampering with the game, injected modules, etc.
Not sure they care about it running in an emulated environment.
They do effectively allocate an executable memory region, copy the machine code that was streamed into it, and jump to it.
I guess in this case the emulation is an actual vm, rather than "rewrite x86 instructions into arm" (don't know much about this subject, but assumed that was how rosetta worked)
I guess could be a good contender for replacing spark, however, I suspect the fact spark is free and open source, which forms a community around it, means that dpolars might struggle to gain traction, when it's gated by a credit card.
I work on a almost 20 year old C# monolith, with 1000+ projects per solution. It doesn't even load in VS or VSC. Rider needs 16GB of ram, but manages to open it. I try to never close the IDE, as it takes 30mins to open.
I use both Rider (for mixed c++/c#) projects and CLion for C++ only.
I feel that Rider is somehow better than CLion at c++, even after CLion Nova (Intellisense based on Resharper backend) became a thing.
One difference is that I write boost::asio in CLion, and just vanilla C++ in Rider, and before Nova it was completely unusable with async code, now it's usable with async code, but after a few days of running the editor I end up with fatal IDE errors for CLion, and never for Rider.
I always found it crazy how zmq gained any traction at all.
"Oh, I have a req/resp workload" - one of the sides restarts, goes out of rhythm with the state of the connection (whether its req or resp), unrecoverable errors.
Every system I've seen use zmq usually use it without these fancy patterns (use yeet messages in any order), and usually have some sort of "Is anybody there on the other side?" message to combat the fact there is no way to introspect connection state (otherwise your writes just block at the high water mark), at which point it would have been easier to just use tcp.
The whole thing to me reeks of mongo. It's great if you are completely incapable/incompetent of solving the problem properly.
It made so much sense back then, when mobile apps were not that robust to networks changing, I assumed it's going to get adopted in no time due to how much of a ux improvement it would have been back in the day.
It's incredibly depressing that this gained barely any traction in the last 10 years, and kernel options are appearing just recently, after everyone has wrapped they http calls in multiple retry handlers, and mobile operating systems have abstracted network connectivity to the point where it feels more like you are using zeromq rather than tcp.