My 10 year old has been building this website using google sites for a year now, he collects interesting/fun/functional links.

https://awebsite.space

Yes! gcc/omp in general solved a lot of the problems which are conveniently left out in the article.

The we have the anecdotal "They failed firefox layout in C++ twice then did it in Rust" < to this I sigh in chrome.

The Rust version of this is "turn .iter() into .par_iter()."

It's also true that for both, it's not always as easy as "just make the for loop parallel." Stylo is significantly more complex than that.

> to this I sigh in chrome.

I'm actually a Chrome user. Does Chrome do what Stylo does? I didn't think it did, but I also haven't really paid attention to the internals of any browsers in the last few years.

And the C++ version is add std::execution::par_unseq as parameter to the ranges algorithm.

This has the same drawbacks as "#pragma omp for".

The hard part isn't splitting loop iterations between threads, but doing so _safely_.

Proving an arbitrary loop's iterations are split in a memory safe way is an NP hard problem in C and C++, but the default behavior in Rust.

Afaik it does all styling and layout in the main thread and offloads drawing instructions to other threads (CompositorTileWorker) and it works fine?

That does sound like Chrome has also either failed to make styling multithreaded in C++ (or haven't attempted it), while it was achieved in Rust?

It has pretty graphics.

Satellites don't work because iran gov. is broadcasting gibberish causing satellite connections to drop.

I watched gnome evolve to the point where your calendar notifies you of meetings 10 minutes prior and has a join button which runs the appropriate application. I also get notifications for new emails and slack messages. Last week I was pleasantly surprised by

    snap install tmnationsforever

We are in a good place.

> why some people are incapable of changing their point of view

I've thought about this and the conclusion was:

What you believe you know makes you what you currently are. You can't just believe in a contradictory position. You could believe that you have been proven wrong, which would then change your belief.

Changing your point of view, looking at things from the vantage of someone else with different life experiences and the resulting belief systems would be dishonest at best, and claiming that you are capable of changing your beliefs on a whim is like being able to rip your arm off.

You can, at best, adapt your own belief to encompass theirs with caveats or simply not care about your truths.

I remember implementing some of these

https://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr/sudoku/12rules.htm

With a simple array of unsigned int and bit operations like 20 years ago. It could solve a lot of puzzles within microseconds. Later I realized rules 1, 2, 5, 6 are pretty much the same.

Why not just

    blocks(Rows, Blocks), maplist(all_distinct, Blocks), maplist(label, Rows)

I did something similar with occult books and famous programming resources.

Conclusion: you find wisdom in everything if you look for it.

we discordians refer to this as the Law of Fives:

>The Law of Fives states simply that: ALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE DIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE, OR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY APPROPRIATE TO 5.

>The Law of Fives is never wrong.

>In the Erisian Archives is an old memo from Omar to Mal-2: "I find the Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look."

yes exactly. Replace five with shit and it still holds.

BTW simply ask the agent "will this work?" after it is done. You will eliminate a great number of bugs and pitfalls that way. And it has more context so no need for a second reviewer.