Claude Code IDE integration for Emacs
github.com
Project Hyperion: Interstellar ship design competition
projecthyperion.org
A fast, growable array with stable pointers in C
danielchasehooper.com
301party.com: Intentionally open redirect
301party.com
Writing a Rust GPU kernel driver: a brief introduction on how GPU drivers work
collabora.com
We'd be better off with 9-bit bytes
pavpanchekha.com
You know more Finnish than you think
dannybate.com
Show HN: Kitten TTS – 25MB CPU-Only, Open-Source TTS Model
github.com
Jules, our asynchronous coding agent
blog.google
Comptime.ts: compile-time expressions for TypeScript
comptime.js.org
Git-fetch-file – Sync files from other repos with commit tracking and safety
github.com
Breaking the sorting barrier for directed single-source shortest paths
quantamagazine.org
The new shape of Mixxx 3.0 – Open Source DJing
mixxx.org
Analyzing Control Flow More Like a Human [video]
wonks.github.io
Converting Existing Users to systemd-homed
systemd.io
Out-Fibbing CPython with the Plush Interpreter
pointersgonewild.com
303Gen – 303 acid loops generator
303-gen-06a668.netlify.app
The arcane alphabets of Black Sabbath
fontsinuse.com
I think this is a cool video.
Sparse and demand-driven dataflow approaches (SSA et al) won out in compilers, in large part because they don't suffer a bound that is related to boolean matrix multiplication of number of points * number of variables. Also, because problems are often easier to reason about when done sparsely or in a demand driven fashion.
While that did not lead to completely demand driven approaches (in most compilers), it led to significant improvements in speed and ability to write compilers.
While some things still remained fairly non-sparse (pointer analysis, et al), for decades, even that has changed now, and demand driven approaches are significantly more common in all aspects of compilers.
So it is not entirely shocking that doing the same for higher order control flow might be a better approach these days :)