Comment Feed for esoteric

Re: Chittur Subbaraman: Inside Windows 7 - Service Controller and Background Processing

esoteric — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 10:46:42 GMT

Definitely a great video Charles. It gives a nice insight into how services and service management is becomming smarter in Windows 7.

posted by esoteric

Re: Expert to Expert: The Basics of SmallBasic

esoteric — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:09:05 GMT

It would be cool with a pure version of this environment for kids as well - where you can't in fact say x += 1. Something to prevent corruption of the mind

posted by esoteric

Re: Expert to Expert: Meijer and Chrysanthakopoulos - Concurrency, Coordination and the CCR

esoteric — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:38:15 GMT

I would like to hear more about integration between concurrency paradigms, formally and practically - in software stacks. To quote Niklas Gustafsson

"The developer division concurrency runtime, on the other hand, is designed to serve as low-level infrastructure for a variety of programming models surfaced in libraries and languages."

"Therefore, we are looking into how we can integrate the CCR functionality on top of the concurrency runtime once we have shipped the latter; it's important to us that it work well with other libraries that may also be used in an application, such as OpenMP, MPI, PLINQ, etc."

PS - http://www.microsoft.com/ccrdss/

posted by esoteric

Re: 10-4 Episode 3: ASP.NET WebForms 4.0

esoteric — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:22:15 GMT

Is there anything Internet Explorer specific to Visual Studio 2010 and .Net Framework 4.0? Otherwise I don't see the point here.

posted by esoteric

Re: 10-4 Episode 3: ASP.NET WebForms 4.0

esoteric — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:20:37 GMT

Nice presentation by Jonathan. Some good explanation of features and I really like this guys style.

posted by esoteric

Re: XAML Guidelines, Part 1

esoteric — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 22:57:32 GMT

Yep. Nothing kills a good interview like bad audio - clipping, distortion and too low volume. And God forbid anyone uses constant background music - like reading text over a difference clouds effect. You know who you are, B.K.

posted by esoteric

Re: Maestro: A Managed Domain Specific Language For Concurrent Programming

esoteric — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:20:55 GMT

I have thoroughly enjoyed all the M and Parallelism talks. For parallelism there is enough to keep you busy for quite some time.

So now we know that Maestro is built on CCR.

CLR

TPL
CCR
Maestro
?

C/C++

I would be interested in

Native vs managed integration? - CRT/PPL vs TPL/threadpool
TPL/CCR integration?
What scale do you expect what libraries to be able to manage?
What level of concurrency do what libraries efficiently enable?
How do what concurrency paradigms affect program complexity and predictability and how future proof will they be
In the past sequential programs became faster with faster processors; we cannot just expect parallel programs to continue to scale - exposing concurrency at some level may seem fine, but it will start to hurt at some level -- program flow prevents absolute parallelism; maximization how? - Niklas talks about speculative parallelism...
Dogfooding -
- Where is Microsoft be dogfooding these libraries - applications and services; what is being done in Windows itself, going forward?
- What will it dogfood where and why?
- How deep into the OS will it dogfood and what will be used where?
- What does concurrency mean for Windows?
Implicit concurrency
- Is it feasible?
- What languages?
- What timescale?
- On what scale?
- Dynamic program optimization for needed parallelism (no. of cores) or static partitioning with "fixed-grained" tasks?
Parallelism concepts, how many are there both research-stage and applied
Will the asking ever stop?

posted by esoteric

Re: Mr. Indigo & Mrs. Azure

esoteric — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 06:03:02 GMT

Your post was the point.

posted by esoteric

Re: C# 4.0 - Questions and reasons behind the answers

esoteric — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:00:50 GMT

As usual, Anders presents us with all the goodies, packaged up in time for Christmas. A paedagogical talent as well.

The explanation of dynamic is very good and should lay to rest the unfounded criticism of the feature. Of course anytime you introduce another hammer there's a chance someone else use it to knock themselves out, but it sure is a nice thing to have. The examples of DOM and REST are very good and I'm very intrigued to explore them closer. Some things are indeed inherently dynamic and "unsafe", you just have to box them in, and that is exactly what the dynamic type does.

Also looking very much forward to the next VS with MEF and "AST coloring" (okay, bad term).

Kudos to the team from Denmark

posted by esoteric

Re: Framework Design Guidelines

esoteric — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 03:46:10 GMT

Interfaces- well there is a third choice between extending interfaces and not using interfaces at all. I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned.

Extend the interface in another v2 interface. Isn't it obvious?

posted by esoteric

Re: Microsoft .NET Framework: CLR Futures

esoteric — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:50:30 GMT

The Design-by-Contract (CodeContract) is of course very Eiffelike, even the old-value semantics is there. The syntax is quite bloated in comparison [as leriksen71 says], but having the semantics at all is a first step. Also, tail recursion optimization is a welcome improvement.

posted by esoteric

Re: Mike Taulty: 44 Amazing Silverlight 2.0 Screencasts

esoteric — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:20:17 GMT

Flash can playback dynamically generated audio. Can I do that with Silverlight 2.0?

posted by esoteric

Re: The Channel 9 beta has been updated...

esoteric — Fri, 16 May 2008 04:51:18 GMT

I like it, it's looking better than C9 now. The background is a little obnoxious tho.

posted by esoteric

Re: The Channel 9 beta has been updated...

esoteric — Fri, 16 May 2008 04:50:36 GMT

Matthew van Eerde wrote:

> No Quote option for replying

Say what?

posted by esoteric

Re: Andy Ayers: Understanding the Phoenix Compiler Framework

esoteric — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:59:54 GMT

AndyA wrote:

I've always wanted to do an IL-to-IL optimizer. While the jit does a good job it doesn't have time for in-depth analysis, and there are a number of things you can do upstream to boost performance.

And that's what all optimization freaks are craving for. And to get conceptual simplicity whilst not sacrificing performance too much [declarative programmer, imperative compiler].

I haven't studied IL and IR, but would the IR actually be a better IL? It sounds like it could be.

If IL is at a lower level than IR, and if an IL-IL optimizer has to maybe abstract up to IR, then wouldn't it be better to just stay with IR - depending on the effort required to go IR->IL.

I wonder if the TCPA could be used to secure highly optimized snapshots of compiled code [in encrypted files] so the JITr could effectively be relieved of a lot of up-front work. Of course there's NGen which might do some optimizations up-front.

AndyA wrote:

As far as what all those cores will be doing -- I expect we will find good ways to employ them to directly address user problems. Phoenix itself can profitably use 6-8 cores, and with a bit more work we should be able to scale even higher.

Sounds great.

AndyA wrote:

It may be that the world of code is more dynamic in the future, but I thought that 10 years ago when I worked on a big static compiler and things haven't really changed that much.

I didn't mean in the sense of dynamic languages (necessarily), more in the sense of JIT'd bytecode.

posted by esoteric

Re: Andy Ayers: Understanding the Phoenix Compiler Framework

esoteric — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:56:45 GMT

Having processor makers produce plugins for Phoenix sounds quite compelling, for Phoenix itself, Microsoft, the processor makers and the users.

And it would be great with more static IL optimizations. On the other hand, in the parallel world of the future, there should be enough cores to continuously GC, profile and analyze code, so one wonders how much Phoenix can adapt to dynamic compilation and analysis demands.

Anyway, cool stuff.

posted by esoteric

Re: Brian Beckman: Project Quark - A New Beginning for Quantum Computing Rises from the Ashes of Theoret

esoteric — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:47:16 GMT

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

posted by esoteric

Re: Expert to Expert: Erik Meijer and Bertrand Meyer - Objects, Contracts, Concurrency, Sleeping Barbers

esoteric — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:48:15 GMT

HOLY CRAP! I have to watch this!

posted by esoteric

Re: Douglas Crockford, Alex Russell and Joseph Smarr: On the Past, Present and Future of JavaScript

esoteric — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 03:33:05 GMT

I don't agree that it's important for a language to be stable for it to be useful and make things like AJAX (yawn) possible. As long as changes are backwards compatible, no problem. Even if not, you can create a compiler for the old version that maps to the new version. I hope we'll see a new language in the browser. Of course we can compile more efficient languages down to Javascript, but building a castle on sand is not that appealing...

posted by esoteric

Re: Burton Smith: On General Purpose Super Computing and the History and Future of Parallelism

esoteric — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:44:43 GMT

I think most of us managed to get the meaning. Anyhow - excellent video!

posted by esoteric

Re: This Week on Channel 9: Feb 8, 2008 Episode

esoteric — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:52:28 GMT

The audio is a bit obnoxious ("walkie-talkie sound"), but otherwise I like these videos. I don't mind long videos, as long as they're not artificially drawn out.

posted by esoteric

Re: Dan Ingalls and Allen Wirfs-Brock: On Smalltalk, Lively Kernel, Javascript and Programming the Inter

esoteric — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:50:50 GMT

Cozy interesting discussion. Here's a presentation of Lively Kernel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGw09RZjQf8

posted by esoteric

Re: Erik Meijer, Gilad Bracha, Mads Torgersen: Perspectives on Programming Language Design and Evolution

esoteric — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 10:11:29 GMT

I think Gilad was *absolutely spot on* about moving the industry forward and somebody is bound to feel "hit" by what he's saying, but it's not arrogance, it's just stating how things are (or at the very least an oppinion of how things are, agree with it or not)... I really enjoy his sense of humor and point of view.

posted by esoteric

Re: Erik Meijer, Gilad Bracha, Mads Torgersen: Perspectives on Programming Language Design and Evolution

esoteric — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:43:21 GMT

One of the best videos in a long time and a bit of an eye-opener. The art of molding software and logic. Also - this looks highly interesting (bookmarked!) http://gbracha.blogspot.com/

posted by esoteric

Re: Brian Keller and Dan Fernandez: Name this Show!

esoteric — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:43:15 GMT

It's like a Channel 9 metashow. So I propose Channel 9 Reflection Weekly. [Absolutely some DiggNation similarity - but DiggNation is a bit too "lallet" (Danish slang word)]

posted by esoteric