please, next time Matt asks for a 2-hour slot for his talk, GIVE IT TO HIM!
not related to >2s hangs, but wrt performance, can you guys take a look at the following debugger windows:
having any one of these open when stopped at a breakpoint brings the IDE to a crawl (see the visible lag when resizing the IDE.)interestingly enough, the autos window doesn't exhibit this behavior.
@Charles: errr, i don't think herb's comment there answers any of my questions.
@Daniel Moth: I think you missed the point of my question.
in the future, suppose:
- you have a C++AMP compiler that targets direct3d v12 which has more capabilities that v11.
- you want to write code that targets the version of direct3d that's available on the user's machine, but you want to take advantage of the new d3dv12 features if available.
it would seem to me that there's definitely a need for versioning there, both at compile time AND at runtime.
will "restrict(direct3d)" always mean v11, if so how will we restrict to v12? if not, won't that break existing code when switching compilers?
ok, i love the fact that I can write 'portable' C++ code in my pixel shaders. but the problem is that as soon as I write "recstrict(direct3d)", my code is, by definition, non-portable. how are you guys going to address portability between 'restrictions' implemented by different compilers? wouldn't it have been better to use non-platform-specific restriction identifiers?
who writes/distributes the AMP runtime components? are they a standard OS component (.so/.dll), or are they a .lib baked in at compile-time? how will these be serviced (apropos GDI+ nightmare)?
will non-Microsoft, direct3d-targeting compilers use Microsoft-supplied direct3d runtimes, or will they have to write their own?
how are you guys going to handle versioning the restrict() restrictions?
will we be able to include different versions of our restricted functions for different versions of direct3d? how will this work, since the override would have to happen at runtime?
sorry for going OT, but I'm also seeing very poor quality in full-screen or zoomed browser. I have a fast connection, and I was able to stream the 'High Quality WMV' without dropping frames. It would be great if you could enable smooth-streaming for some of the higher bitrate streams.
I'm not sure that the presence of InterlockedIncrement effectively refutes Erik's argument that Actors are a NOT good substitute for expressing mutability (or other higher-level state interactions) in the type system. Let's get more of this functional goodness baked (tie-dyed?) into the CTS & BCL, please?
Bart, do you have any plans to update your blog post to reflect the changes to the managed Z3 API?
EDIT: i've managed to get a version of Bart's code to build/run against Z3 v2.15, but i don't think i can share it since i can't find a license on Bart's blog
Nov 26, 2010 at 5:11PM
just wondering if there are any plans to provide some lower cost 'shared-hosting'-type environment in Azure where many ASP.NET applications are configured to run on a single virtual instance with costs being proportional to the amount of actual CPU usage, not necessarily wall-clock uptime.