Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
boyter.org | ||
| | | | |
indragie.com
|
|
| | | | | How I built a tool that gives AI agents access to the runtime context they need to accurately debug slow code. | |
| | | | |
codecapsule.com
|
|
| | | | | This is Part 5 of the IKVS series, "Implementing a Key-Value Store". You can also check the Table of Contents for other parts. In this article, I will study the actual implementations of hash tables in C++ to understand where are the bottlenecks. Hash functions are CPU-intensive and should be optimized for that. However, most of the | |
| | | | |
blog.vbang.dk
|
|
| | | | | I've been on a bender for the past few weeks. I haven't been able to stop reading and watching content about TigerBeetle. I was especially enamored by videos... | |
| | | | |
konradreiche.com
|
|
| | | Writing a generic protobuf writer in Go is straightforward. We simply use proto.Marshal with the protobuf message because proto.Marshal expects the proto.Message interface, which all generated protobuf messages implement. However, when it comes to reading serialized protobuf data into a specific Go type, historically, we had to specify the type explicitly: var post pb.Post if err := proto.Unmarshal(b, &post); err != nil { return nil, err } This approach is clear and explicit: what you see is what you get. But what if you need a more generic solution? You might encounter a scenario similar to mine: a cache abstraction designed to handle different kinds of protobuf messages generically. My initial attempt looked like this: | ||
