Would be nice if authors compared to some of the existing linear algebra packages with SIMD support like Eigen[1] which I've found to be very useful and easy to use. Header only includes, additional functionality and cache sensitive algorithms in addition to SIMD.
What kind of comparison are you looking for? Both libraries offer different levels of abstractions and functionality altogether. The paper linked here offers abstractions over the registers/intrinsics themselves and Eigen offers abstractions at the array and matrix level, plus all the built in algorithms/etc. Eigen is the type of library that might utilize a library like the one linked to implement functionality/algorithms. Maybe you want to know whats going on under the hood of Eigen?
I currently use it for java and c++ builds inside a largish tech company. Build systems are definitely not one size fits all though so I would encourage you to pick one that meets needs of your project. If you want to build for different platforms like unix, windows, iOS, android and have a big complicated build then I'd encourage you to check out bazel. If your project needs are pretty simple I'd say just start off with a simple makefile.
+1 for bazel. It also scales to large builds and handles java as well. We've seen big decreases in build times by using it as it does caching, parallel execution and good dependency analysis.
Getting up to speed can take a little doing though as the original docs weren't great and there are some counter intuitive things about it. I think the docs are improving but some things a little odd like everything gets dumped into ~/.cache/bazel without any command line option to change [1]. Feels like the first time I used git where you suspect that the authors designed it to be difficult to keep the lazy away.
Love this idea!! Verify backups or some portions of backups randomly from time to time would be great. This is one of the biggest problems I've seen with backups. A number of cases where "it used to work" but now it doesn't a year later when you need the backup.
Pinterest has a Head of Diversity [1]. Her name is Candice and she's great. I can see how people are sensitive to diversity issues as humanity has a long history of various forms of discrimination. Let's try to be data driven here though and see if we can take some lessons from other fields that have had success with issues of diversity. For example, it sure seems like medicine has really moved the needle on the percent of doctors that are women over the last 10-30 years. I'm sure there are some lessons in there that we could use to help our diversity in software and engineering as well.
>Pinterest has a Head of Diversity [1]. Her name is Candice and she's great.
I think the question is: What does the role actually do? The cynic in me says it exists to signal that your company cares about diversity. Okay, but after the hiring decision is made, based on whatever criteria make the company properly diverse, what happens? Does this person act as a recruiter for underrepresented people?
Pinterest's policy is to hire people on what they can do, not who they are. Hire the best person for the position not a specific gender or other trait. My understanding is that Candice's role is to help ensure that we're avoiding biases in the our hiring process, trying to ensure that that we have a diverse pool of candidates to begin with and work on longer term programs that help to generate well qualified diverse candidates. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they know how to make the tech industry population similar to the overall US population distribution but I think it is still good to have people thinking about it and working on it.
How do we really know race and gender are discriminating factors? Do we look at anything else or are we just making zero effort to do more than just confirm our biases?
We might as well take into account their financial background too, for example whether their parents grew up poor. It's about as relevant as someone's race, gender, and sexual orientation when it comes to hiring decisions.
Unless it's actually all about scoring useless PR points, or, more sinisterly, cowing to the demands of progressive extremists that threaten violence and negative media exposure. If that's what it's about then we can safely assume race, gender, and sexual orientation are irrelevant when it comes to hiring practices, and instead we can just hire random people that seem remotely qualified (which is what we have already been doing before this madness began).
My experience has been that my H1-B coworkers don't get paid as well as US counterparts sand that there is significant friction for them to change companies or even get a big promotion if they are in process of applying for green card. Rather than adding more rules to an already difficult process though I think the best solution would be to allow people with H1-B to easily change jobs after some period of time at the original sponsoring company (e.g. 6-12 months). That way it would be harder to pay below market rates and would be much more dynamic than having the government trying to estimate what the prevailing wage should be.
I get really frustrated though with most articles on the H1-B visas which either seem to be bashing immigrants or imply that somehow more government regulation will help the situation. In my experience growing up in the US we are incredibly lucky to have such talented people coming here to work and they have contributed incredibly to the tech companies in the US which are really one of the few bright spots in the US economy. Some of the smartest and hardest working colleagues I have grew up in other countries and we are lucky that they have come here to build the US economy.
In my experience learning is not a "one size fits all" product product, or even fits most. I'd really like to see schools have more resources and expertise to address different kids learning styles and aptitudes as I have yet to see a single style of teaching that works for all kids. Ideally they wouldn't have to go to different schools as I think it is good socially to learn to interact with all different types of people from an early age.
The pain for me here isn't that process can take some extra time, it is that the developer doesn't know what is expected and keeps getting surprised at every step. It can soak up a lot of calendar time and developer motivation to have a code change swatted back and forth as different people weigh in with various undocumented guidelines/policies/standards over a period of days or even weeks. This could have been a very different experience if developer had known what was expected from the start.
Ideally I'd like to see code reviews culturally in an organization be mostly about catching bugs and collaboratively learning the craft of coding better. It can be very frustrating and demotivating when it devolves into a series of undocumented style and naming requirements. I think it is good to have standards and process but seems like most places I've worked are woefully short on documenting these hidden requirements.
Even if relatively small in market size compared to current Android install base I think Google would like to grab some of Apple's profit from the high end. While Apple has around 17% of unit sales in smartphones they earn something like 91% of the profit [1]. I'm sure other competitors will be aiming to get some of that profit for themselves or at least make life hard for Apple by using competition to drive down Apple's margins.
[1] http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Main_Page