Welcome to becoming a project manager.

> Just do the cutoff when everyone is asleep.

In this age, many smaller companies serve customers across the globe. There is no common “asleep”.

DuckDB has one of my favourite articles on this topic if you want something a little more high level: https://duckdb.org/2022/10/28/lightweight-compression

> My experience with GHA default caches is that it’s absolutely dog slow.

For reference, oven-sh/setup-bun opted to install dependencies from scratch over using GHA caching since the latter was somehow slower.

https://github.com/oven-sh/setup-bun/issues/14#issuecomment-...

I strongly relate to this in many ways.

Because of OSS, I’ve never actually applied for a job or done a Leetcode interview. I’ve gotten multiple direct offers through Twitter DMs (I don’t post) and multiple referrals through random encounters that I never used.

E.g. Debugging an interesting issue with GitHub customer support eventually led to a referral for Microsoft by an MD. Similar stories with Cloudflare and more.

It’s not limited to OSS, but just having any sort of backing credibility to your name without going through the whole CV/CL process unlocks a whole slew of opportunities since people can “pre-screen” you from the start.

You're sort of describing networks more broadly whether you initiate a connection or someone at a company does. Latterly, I didn't apply in the usual sense for 25 years or so.

Don't code a lot but have written books which led to book signings at conferences that probably led to other opportunities if I had the need to exploit them.

I feel it’s an evolution of the term “Devrel” which still feels tacky.

Nor would you want someone who built most of their career as an actual engineer to suddenly drop that term and become a generic someone in “marketing”. They’re more than that for sure.

I quite like the terminology the more I think about it.

https://github.com/aarondfrancis

Totally. An engineer, who (at the the time) works in marketing! Makes sense to me :D

Also worth checking out libxev[1] by Mitchell Hashimoto. It’s a Zig based event loop (similar to libuv) inspired by Tigerbeetle’s implementation.

[1] https://github.com/mitchellh/libxev

Also, the Zig 0.16.0 preview nightly builds includes a new Io library[0]. I have not used libxev or Tigerbeetles event loop, but I believe the standard Zig implementation is likely largely influenced by those two.

[0] https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/std/#std.Io, or https://ziglang.org/documentation/0.16.0/std/#std.Io after the release

I’m curious, how do you know it was inspired by tiger beetles impl?

They look very similar so that makes sense, just curious on the order of events.

Also I tried using libxev for a project of mine and found it really broke the zig way of doing things. All these callbacks needed to return disarm/rearm instead of error unions so I had to catch every single error instead of being able to use try.

I could have reworked it further to make try work but found the entire thing very verbose and difficult to use with 6 params for all the callback functions.

Thankfully my use case was such that poll() was more than sufficient and that is part of zigs posix namespace so that was what I went with.

> I’m curious, how do you know it was inspired by tiger beetles impl?

Describing its design, the readme for libxev says "credit to this awesome blog post" and links to the same Tigerbeetle post in this submission.

I recently created this, which is largely based on ideas from libxev, but my optimized for my zio runtime. https://github.com/lalinsky/aio.zig

> I'd love to know how much LLM was used to write this if any, and how much effort went into it as well (if it was LLM-assisted.)

Are people supposed to be obligated to post such a report nowadays?

I enjoyed the article and found it really interesting, but seeing these types of comments always kind of puts a damper on it afterwards.

> Are people supposed to be obligated to post such a report nowadays?

No, typically when I ask questions it's optional.

> I enjoyed the article and found it really interesting, but seeing these types of comments always kind of puts a damper on it afterwards.

That is why I waited half a day, and until after there were lots of comments praising the article. Still, I'm sorry if it put a damper on it for you.

Also the whole reason I asked about the source is because I think the article has a lot of merit and so I am curious if it's because the author put a lot of work in (LLM-assisted or not.) Usually when I get that feeling it's followed by a realization I'm wasting my time on something the author didn't even read closely.

But I didn't get that this time, and I'd love more examples of LLMs being used (with effort, presumably) to produce something the author could take pride in.

> But I didn't get that this time,

Actually, I take it back. I did think I was wasting my time when I noticed it was written by an LLM. But then I came back to HN an saw only praise and decided to wait a bit to see if people kept finding it useful before commenting.

I was somewhat excited by the prospect of this article being useful, but I've started to come around to my initial impression after another day. I don't really trust it.

In fact, v1 code usually uses v2 code under the hood, but with different options to maintain backwards compatibility.

You still get performance improvements even if you don’t switch over to the new import!

A good example is io/ioutil. It's useful to migrate to eliminate the deprecation messages, but you don't need to do it right away.

Also, most of this can be automated with `go install golang.org/x/tools/gopls/internal/analysis/modernize/cmd/modernize@latest && modernize -fix ./...`

“Chemicals” are overused as a term for sure, but there is a huge difference between what’s legal in America and Europe that brings a shred of truth to the previous statements.

For example, common ingredients like potassium bromate or ADA are straight up banned in the EU for health concerns.

Reading the ingredient list of American bread is plain shocking at times.

Individual cases are interesting. For example, Wikipedia says this of E122:

> In the US, this color was listed in 1939 as Ext. D&C Red No. 10 for use in externally applied drugs and cosmetics. It was delisted in 1963 because no party was interested in supporting the studies needed to establish safety. It was not used in food in the US.

> Azorubine has shown no evidence of mutagenic or carcinogenic properties and an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0–4 mg/kg was established in 1983 by the WHO.

Wikipedia's article on E180 is a stub. Wikipedia's article on E105 says it's now banned in both the US and EU, but it doesn't say when it was banned: did the US ever approve it?