News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why has CPU frequency ceased to grow? (2014) by pjmlp on Wednesday February 21, 2018 @11:52AM (#16430823)
I hardly see a difference from

    go func () { }
and

    Task.Run(() => { })
With the benefit that on the latter example, the runtime allows me to customise how scheduling is done.
Re:Why has CPU frequency ceased to grow? (2014) by quadcore on Thursday February 22, 2018 @02:52AM (#16435980)
Are those Tasks coroutines? If yes, do they yield on any sleeps?

These aspects are key to goroutines.

Re:Why has CPU frequency ceased to grow? (2014) by pjmlp on Thursday February 22, 2018 @03:43AM (#16436175)
Yes they do, they are the building blocks for async/await, get a thread allocated from a thread pool when running, and you can control how the scheduling takes place, by providing your own scheduler implementation.
Re:Why has CPU frequency ceased to grow? (2014) by ta2384428 on Thursday February 22, 2018 @08:54AM (#16437520)
That is pretty cool, C++ has come a long way since I used it last about 15 years ago.

It seems like both languages are equally capable here, with C++ having more power and foot guns when required as usual.

Re:Why has CPU frequency ceased to grow? (2014) by pjmlp on Thursday February 22, 2018 @01:25PM (#16439937)
The code snippet example I wrote was actually .NET with TPL.

C++ with PPL on Windows, would be

    task<T> handle = create_task([] { /* ... */ });
And with standard C++

    future<T> handle = std::async(std::launch::async, [] { /* ... */ });
In both cases, with C++20 it will be possible to co_await handle, which you can already play with on clang and VC++.