Caml 1.0 was released in '85 and OCaml (the O is for Object Orientation) was 1996. Multithreading wasn't a high priority for anybody back then. The JVM didn't even have threads until 1997 and those threads were green threads, OS threads came to Java later.
However this is all Unix and academia based. If you wrote code for Windows and OS/2 in the commercial world you were using threads sine '89 and thus did not want to use the languages that did not use threads e.g. python, OCaml
In the late 80s and early 90s we wrote things with threads but they were primarily a kind of convenience to get multitasking behaviour and not any kind of performance boost.
Multicore / multiprocessor systems were not a mainstream thing in consumer hardware until the 21st century.
It would be pretty difficult to write threaded code for Windows in 1989, since it didn't support threads until WinNT 3.1 (1993).
But even in late 90s it was still common for desktop Win9x apps to use the main window message loop for async processing (Win32 API itself heavily encouraged it at the time - e.g. that's how OS timers work) in lieu of threads.
That was much later, in the mid 90s. But who did have threads in the mid 80s was Erlang which back then only existed in Ericsson's research lab. Ericsson had anpther internal language which Erlang drev inspiration from which also had support for concurrency.
As the other commenter said it's not a LAN issue. Z-Wave is a mesh radio protocol totally independent of the LAN. There are in fact issues with older Z-Wave specs and versions bogging down due to congestion.
I love Apple but I also know that in these situations where they're being forced to punch a whole in their walled garden that they'll usually just go about making the solution as shitty to use as possible.
They might let other engines in, sure; but will they relax the restriction on their memory mapping entitlements to allow for optimizing JITs? Doubt it. Means you'll only be able to use alternative rendering engines that have JS interpreters with no optimizing JIT. Stuff like that.
If it means that I can stop accidentally swiping left and right on webpages, and leaving web pages where I have entered text without prompting me, it’s unfortunately a solid trade off.
Similar to how people say "I hate so and so" in sports - there's no actual hatred or ill will towards the person (although there are some nutcases out there that mean it), it's just easier than making up some new vocabulary to describe or to preamble everything with padding.
As the Sports Guy said, there's sports hate and regular hate.
It does dawn on me the possibility that I'm also over analyzing your comment :)
The JVM has a ton of different things going on, it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
For one, the JVM isn't sandboxed by default. WASM is. That adds additional overhead.
Another consideration is that the JVM uses garbage collection. This doesn't just apply to the code itself, it includes things like the hot code cache and stuff. The JVM trades throughput for latency. WASM doesn't have a GC model.
Lastly, WASM doesn't define the runtime. There is no JIT for "WASM", that's just a bytecode spec. I'm actually not even sure if when you run it in a browser it will JIT the WASM bytecode.
I would also expect GC to be an advantage for WASM here, since it originated from a language without a GC. Having to run a GC is slower than not having to run a GC, and the WASM code from the article doesn't need garbage collection.
Sandboxing is a plausible explaination. I can't imagine seccomp filters hurt performance that bad, but who knows how V8 does its sandboxing.
Are there any comprehensive benchmarks of WASM runtimes?
I've been using V8 to benchmark WASM code because its convenient, and because WASM in V8 is the obvious comparison to make when benchmarking against Javascript code. But if one of the other WASM runtimes does a better job optimizing, it might be interesting to see that.
I don't know if it's device specific but I use "Hey Siri, turn on the overhead lights and the floor lamp" for example all the time. I have a HomePod though.
Weird, I have a homepod (mini) also. In fact I hardly have any Apple stuff anymore, I only got homepods because it was the most privacy-friendly option out of the big three. I just have an iPad from work which I used to set them up. And most of my automation goes through Home Assistant anyway.
When I give a double command Siri literally tells me she can't do two things at the same time and I have to present them as two separate commands.
Perhaps it's because I have it set to UK English? Perhaps it's smarter in US English. I'll have to try that.
It's only about 60% of what you're asking for but I'm a fan of DKOldies: https://www.dkoldies.com
They're a US storefront but they ship internationally. They do a great job restoring consoles. And they have amazing customer service (one of the SNES Controller refurbs was a no-go and they cross-shipped a replacement with no expectation that I even returned the defective one).
I don't know if they have old computer stuff, mostly just consoles. They have Atari consoles sometimes though.
This necessitates force-pushing to your feature branch after all the fixup commits have been approved and then squashed. At that point you can merge the cleaned up feature branch in to your develop or trunk.
`--force-with-lease` is slightly better than `--force` because in the event that you're also working on a collaborative feature branch you won't overwrite any commits that somebody else pushed up that you haven't fetched yet.
This is the kind of workflow that makes me headdesk. Those fixup commits weren't obvious, and will be useful context if a future maintainer ever has to go back to these - they shouldn't be squashed.
So many times law enforcement take advantage of this too, to fingerprint devices. The number of people caught because someone leaks packets outside the VPN for a few seconds because they forgot to configure VPN to disable outbound data if VPN drops... I've long wondered if making always on VPN require MDM provisioning on iPhones was a sop to police/criminal investigation forces, especially after Apple's public fights with the FBI over matters like the locked San Bernadino phone etc. I bet very few crims installing VPNs are aware of that apple support doc.
If this was working as it arguably should and could be done easily without MDM provisioning, it would remove a genuinely useful avenue for law enforcement and add more fuel to the the FBI's dislike for Apple's security features.
You used FBI and the term law enforcement in the same sentence. Sad to say the respect I once had for what the FBI likes and dislikes has been greatly diminished by the political bias that seems to influence it’s actions. I look forward to the day when they are strictly law enforcement and without political agenda. We as a country need them.
I wonder if there's a small bit of pressure on the device manufacturers to keep DNS leaks happening for consumers. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at some of the NatSec-level conversations.
Should it be expected that individual users should be familiar with corporate deployment documentation just to know that their VPN app they bought actually leaks?
I'm not following. Your link appears to be specific to corporate environments. The title of the document is:
"VPN overview for Apple device deployment."
It further states "Secure access to private corporate networks is available in iOS ..."
An individual iPhone user who is not using a company issued device would not be beholden to MDM restrictions or profiles. Nor would access to "private corporate networks" be necessarily relevant.
It's written that way because the target audience is enterprise IT folks who are managing fleets of employee devices, but you can freely use MDM profiles as a consumer. It's certainly not user-friendly which is why I commented that the way it works for VPN clients installed as apps could be seen as a dubious implementation.
Yes and if it's an unmanaged device it is by definition not being managed by an MDM. The title of the link makes it clear that the context is "device deployment." Further the section un the linked article states"Always On VPN"
">Always On VPN activation requires device supervision."
Supervision denotes a managed device"
"Supervision generally denotes that the device is owned by the organization, which provides additional control over its configuration and restrictions."[1]
No regular non-corporate iOS device user is ever likely to be downloading manually distributed mobile profiles.
The Bytecode Alliance is a nonprofit group with members from all over the industry working to provide what is ostensibly a reference implementation of a WebAssembly runtime w/ full WASI support. Wasmtime is their implementation.
They are far from the only implementation, though. You can find links to other runtimes in other comments here already.
