Question for Stephen for a future video: I often hear you say "If I could go back and do Tasks/async await differently..." but you never really elaborate. I would love to know what things you would do differently!
Likely because it’s based on a state machine rather than concurrent patterns . Remember it’s only syntactic sugar but is often implemented in cases where developers intend for true asynchronous cases and it ain’t all that…
The tangent on simd was fascinating. I have pondered on optimizing loops before and now learning that they can be vectorised and have multiple operations happen at a time just expanded my views. Please keep doing this series. This is the stuff we developers need out on the webs. Top tier computer scientists with decades of experience just talking about concepts at all different levels. Epsecially for people like myself who work for themselves or maybe don't have colleagues or friends in the developer space, these kinds of coversations are incredibly valuable.
It's great to have the internals explained and demonstrated showing every step in detail. Really liked the "(unit)i < (unit)source.Length". Awesome guys.
DEEP Dive series are amazing!! They are not "bla-bla-super-duper" talks but a diamond gems that reveals hidden aspects of technology!! Keep up such an excellent talks!
Love this series on several aspects. Both hosts work very well together. It gives great insight into 'magic' we use on a daily basis and now take for granted. We see what thoughts and considerations go into optimization, after a solid basis has been created. Which in the end opens up the mind to see things through a different lense and gives ideas for new concepts and patterns. Great job!
I'm amazed by how clear and insightful it is. Stephen's ability to break down complex topics into understandable, low-level explanations is truly commendable. This video has been incredibly helpful in deepening my understanding. A huge thank you to Stephen Toub and the team behind this invaluable instructional content!
I love this series of deep dives. Even more so, the mentioning and tie ins to lowered and IL. This stuff is gold no matter you level, there is something to take away for everyone. Even internal to MSFT, ive told coworkers and other devs about this (and the async one especially).
That tangent about SIMD was awesome. It's not something I've ever dove into. I had to pause and ask CoPilot what you guys were talking about. Really awesome stuff guys! Love this series!
Loving this content--Deep dives that don't treat the viewer like an idiot. There's not enough software dev content out there that assumes the viewer is already an expert.
Can I suggest Stephen Toub and Joe Albahari together moderated by amazing Scott, from a designer and consumer perspectives and show us great stuff is built
Stephen: Sorry, I'm probably getting a bit nerdy. Scott: Well, tell us in the comments if this is what you want to see? Comments: THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In regard to optimization at 48:00, why are type checks being used within an entry method at all? Why can't there be overloads and generics to support these separate paths instead? Then tree trimming would work properly and it should just be straight up faster as there's slightly less code to execute.
I think the LINQ keywords are totally superfluous and unnecessary. They can't and don't cover all use cases, like when I have to create my own extension methods to operate on enumerables. The keywords might make sense if you were loosely copying SQL syntax but instead they exactly (and awkwardly) match the extension method chaining.
You do Where, then Select. When calling Select you check if your source happens to be WhereEnumerable and if so then instead of returning SelectEnumerable you combine them into single WhereSelectEnumerable and return it.
@@pagorbunov Oh, right. In my mental model, I was missing that nothing's actually executed until the call chain is "materialized" (ie, .ToList() or whatever is called). I was visualizing it as "Execute Where, pass those results to Select" and confused how we were skipping execution of the Where. What's really going on is at the end, we wind up one "thing" whose execution will "materialize" the results. And the new WhereSelect grabs the Where's arguments (source and predicate) and in effect "jumps the queue". ... I think that makes sense? Words are hard, massive respect to communicators like Scott and Steve who can communicate arcane details understandably but also precisely...
This would be superb video if only not presentation -- you found space for padding (top and bottom), for taskbar, for face frames, and well in rest you squeezed the least important content -- the code with 2px font. Awesome logic/thinking.
Given how hard we are personally working on these videos and these series, I would remind you that we are real humans doing their best. I look forward to your well-produced videos on these topics. That said, I agree this one got a little fancier and that we should zoom in on the code more. That message can be delivered without dripping sarcasm. 🥰
@@shanselman "I would remind you that we are real humans doing their best." Of course, but even with stellar content if you don't wrap it appropriately it is not so good after all, and the effort to some degree is wasted. From the other side -- in previous episodes you reminded about font size, during this one you completely skipped this part. And either I am dreaming, or you constantly were squinting your eyes and moving forward. Think about even less fortunate people, with worse eyesight, thank you (checklist would help a lot).
