cycle | jQuery Cycle Plugin - Slideshow goodness | Plugin library

One way to solve the issue is by parameterizing the ParentDTO Class with its own children.

There are two answers to your question :

• the absolutist : indeed, the context managers will not serve their role, the GC will have to clean the mess that should not have happened
• the pragmatic : true, but is it actually a problem ? Your file handle will get released a few milliseconds later, what's the bother ? Does it have a measurable impact on production, or is it just bikeshedding ?

I'm not an expert to Python alt implementations' differences (see this page for PyPy's example), but I posit that this lifetime problem will not occur in 99% of cases. If you happen to hit in prod, then yes, you should address it (either with your proposal, or a mix of generator with context manager) otherwise, why bother ? I mean it in a kind way : your point is strictly valid, but irrelevant to most cases.

Please report to Microsoft either using the people app in windows or the visual studio installer.

for now, there is only one option: use visual studio 2019. or try finding alternatives. there should be somewhere around the net

I suggest using Rider IDE instead(until the devs fix the bug):Download Rider IDE

I'm not really trying to advertise here, just suggesting an IDE Too compile and run you rprogram.

The AllModuleActions type is recursive in a way that the compiler cannot handle very well. You are indexing arbitrarily deep into an object type all at once to produce a big union type; I've run into this problem before here when generating all the dotted paths of an object type (e.g., {a: {b: string, c: number}} becomes "a.b" | "a.c").

You don't usually see the problem when you evaluate something like AllModuleActions when M is a specific type; but when it's an unspecified generic type parameter (or a type that depends on such a type parameter), you can run into trouble. You might see that "excessively deep" error. Even worse, the compiler tends to get bogged down, spiking CPU usage and slowing down your IDE. I don't know exactly why this happens.

Probably the best advice is not to build types like this. If you have to, then there are some ways I've found to help, but they aren't foolproof:

Sometimes you can cause the compiler to defer evaluation of one of these types by rephrasing it as a distributive conditional type. If M is a generic type parameter and AllModuleActions gives you trouble, maybe M extends any ? AllModuleActions : never won't:

Has been fixed recently: https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-integration/issues/3694.

Will be released next week for upcoming Spring Boot 2.6.2.

As a workaround, instead of @EnablePublisher you can add this bean:

You can see the cost of instructions on most mainstream architecture here and there. Based on that and assuming you use for example an Intel Skylake processor, you can see that one 32-bit imul instruction can be computed per cycle but with a latency of 3 cycles. In the optimized code, 2 lea instructions (which are very cheap) can be executed per cycle with a 1 cycle latency. The same thing apply for the sal instruction (2 per cycle and 1 cycle of latency).

This means that the optimized version can be executed with only 2 cycle of latency while the first one takes 3 cycle of latency (not taking into account load/store instructions that are the same). Moreover, the second version can be better pipelined since the two instructions can be executed for two different input data in parallel thanks to a superscalar out-of-order execution. Note that two loads can be executed in parallel too although only one store can be executed in parallel per cycle. This means that the execution is bounded by the throughput of store instructions. Overall, only 1 value can only computed per cycle. AFAIK, recent Intel Icelake processors can do two stores in parallel like new AMD Ryzen processors. The second one is expected to be as fast or possibly faster on the chosen use-case (Intel Skylake processors). It should be significantly faster on very recent x86-64 processors.

Note that the lea instruction is very fast because the multiply-add is done on a dedicated CPU unit (hard-wired shifters) and it only supports some specific constant for the multiplication (supported factors are 1, 2, 4 and 8, which mean that lea can be used to multiply an integer by the constants 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9). This is why lea is faster than imul/mul.

I can reproduce the slower execution with -O2 using GCC 11.2 (on Linux with a i5-9600KF processor).

The main source of source of slowdown comes from the higher number of micro-operations (uops) to be executed in the -O2 version certainly combined with the saturation of some execution ports certainly due to a bad micro-operation scheduling.

Here is the assembly of the loop with -Os:

First off, you can further reduce the theoretical cycles to 6 by replacing the first mul with uzp1 and doing the following smull and smlal the other way around: mul, mul, smull, smlal => smull, uzp1, mul, smlal This also heavily reduces the register pressure so that we can do an even deeper unrolling (up to 32 per iteration)

And you don't need v2 coefficents, but you can pack them to the higher part of v1

Let's rule out everything by unrolling this deep and writing it in assembly:

No, without position:absolute its not possible.

For the Position Reset you can use Javascript. Here's a example;

On Haswell and later, yes. On Ivy Bridge and earlier, no.

On Ice Lake and later, Agner Fog says macro-fusion is done right after decode, instead of in the decoders which required the pre-decoders to send the right chunks of x86 machine code to decoders accordingly. (And Ice Lake has slightly different restrictions: Instructions with a memory operand cannot fuse, unlike previous CPU models. Instructions with an immediate operand can fuse.) So on Ice Lake, macro-fusion doesn't let the decoders handle more than 5 instructions per clock.

Wikichip claims that only 1 macro-fusion per clock is possible on Ice Lake, but that's probably incorrect. Harold tested with my microbenchmark on Rocket Lake and found the same results as Skylake. (Rocket Lake uses a Cypress Cove core, a variant of Sunny Cove back-ported to a 14nm process, so it's likely that it's the same as Ice Lake in this respect.)

Your results indicate that uops_issued.any is about half instructions, therefore you are seeing macro-fusion of most pairs. (You could also look at the uops_retired.macro_fused perf event. BTW, modern perf has symbolic names for most uarch-specific events: use perf list to see them.)

The decoders will still produce up-to-four or even five uops per clock on Skylake-derived microarchitectures, though, even if they only make two macro-fusions. You didn't look at how many cycles MITE is active, so you can't see that execution stalls most of the time, until there's room in the ROB / RS for an issue-group of 4 uops. And that opens up space in the IDQ for a decode group from MITE.

• Loop-carried dependency through dec ecx: only 1/clock because each dec has to wait for the result of the previous to be ready.

• Only one taken branch can execute per cycle (on port 6), and dec/jge is taken almost every time, except for 1 in 2^32 when ECX was 0 before the dec.
  The other branch execution unit on port 0 only handles predicted-not-taken branches. https://www.realworldtech.com/haswell-cpu/4/ shows the layout but doesn't mention that limitation; Agner Fog's microarch guide does.

• Branch prediction: even jumping to the next instruction, which is architecturally a NOP, is not special cased by the CPU. Slow jmp-instruction (Because there's no reason for real code to do this, except for call +0 / pop which is special cased at least for the return-address predictor stack.)

  This is why you're executing at significantly less than one instruction per clock, let alone one uop per clock.

Surprisingly to me, MITE didn't go on to decode a separate test and jcc in the same cycle as it made two fusions. I guess the decoders are optimized for filling the uop cache. (A similar effect on Sandybridge / IvyBridge is that if the final uop of a decode-group is potentially fusable, like dec, decoders will only produce 3 uops that cycle, in anticipation of maybe fusing the dec next cycle. That's true at least on SnB/IvB where the decoders can only make 1 fusion per cycle, and will decode separate ALU + jcc uops if there is another pair in the same decode group. Here, SKL is choosing not to decode a separate test uop (and jcc and another test) after making two fusions.)