Full Width [alt+shift+f] Shortcuts [alt+shift+k]
Sign Up [alt+shift+s] Log In [alt+shift+l]
1

Finding active GitHub forks from the command line

from Krzysztof Kowalczyk blog [alt+shift+b] in programming

I maintain SumatraPDF on GitHub. People fork it and make their own changes. I want to know which forks are active and what they’re working on. GitHub has a Network tab for this. I find it lousy. It’s hard to see active forks at a glance. Panning and zooming the UI is slow and fiddly. I just want a sorted list of forks with actual changes. So I wrote a small script: github-active-forks.ts. What it does It uses the GitHub API to find forks that have ahead commits (changes not in upstream) from the last year. For each active branch it prints: a link to the branch on GitHub short sha, author, relative date, first line of commit message Forks are sorted by most recent activity, oldest first. Commits within a branch are oldest first. It compares each fork branch against the matching upstream branch (e.g. rel3.6working vs rel3.6working), not always master. That way you only see commits unique to the fork. How to run it Download the script: curl -O https://gist.githubusercontent.com/kjk/71a7679dd408d52bc612cdf5eecace58/raw/7d7f605dde6b739424e5190a79e3988477312e74/github-active-forks.ts You need Bun and the GitHub CLI logged in (gh auth login). Or set GITHUB_TOKEN. Run it on any repo as owner/repo: bun github-active-forks.ts sumatrapdfreader/sumatrapdf Progress goes to stderr; results go to stdout, so you can redirect to a file: bun github-active-forks.ts sumatrapdfreader/sumatrapdf > forks.txt Example output Excerpt from running on SumatraPDF (74 forks with ahead commits): https://github.com/wackget/sumatrapdf-Feldherren-version/tree/single-page-fit-scrollbar (289d ago) c53a51d wackget 294d ago Added scrollbar usable in Fit a Single Page display mode. f927640 wackget 294d ago scrollbar in single page mode now obeys the hideScrollbars setting. 7f57861 wackget 288d ago improved scrolling speed when zoomed in, in non-continuous single-page view. https://github.com/xyzzyx99/sumatrapdf/tree/rel3.6working (5d ago) c8d1f7b...
18th Jun 2026

Stay updated

Get a weekly newsletter with the top 5 articles worth reading every week.

More from Krzysztof Kowalczyk blog

SumatraPDF new features: March 18, 2026

New in the SumatraPDF pre-release builds: DDE commands accept arguments Commands sent via DDE can take arguments, the same as in custom shortcuts (#5383). Loading message in tab While a document loads, its tab shows a “loading” message instead of the home page (#5385). Install 32-bit on 64-bit Windows The installer lets you install the 32-bit version on 64-bit Windows (#5379). Changes for this day · Full changelog

2 weeks ago • 1 votes
Optimizing memory use in markdown parser

I’m porting gpui-component (a Rust UI component library built on GPUI) to C++ as gpui-cpp. By which I mean: my friend Claude does the porting, I’m just directing. It uses markdown-rs (a CommonMark + GFM parser) markdown parser so I ported it too. Then I optimized it. This post describes what I did with the intention of teaching other how to optimize C++ code. The starting point There are 2 kinds of markdown parser: those that stream nodes as they parse those that build an AST in memory markdown-rs builds an AST. The game is about minimizing the size of AST node. In Rust there are various kinds of nodes, the largest being 152 bytes. Claude generated a single Node struct of 232 bytes. I got it down to 16 bytes. Here’s the initial Node struct, before optimizations: Node, 232 bytes k children 24 position 24 8 string fields — 128 bytes align 24 nums 16 grey = padding and small fields · blue = growable vector · yellow = pointer+length strings Node, 16 bytes (same scale) lastKid · sibling · firstStr · kind+flags Where the 232 went: 8 string fields at 16 bytes each (a char* plus a length), two growable vectors at 24 bytes each (children and table alignments), a 24-byte unist Position (line, column and offset at each end), six bools one to a byte, and the padding all of that dragged in. Every node in the tree pays for every field, whichever kind it is. A Text node uses one string field and nothing else. Arena allocator It’s important that all allocations are done in an arena. Nodes in a parse tree all have the same lifetime which makes it a perfect use for an arena: a bump allocator that can only grow. The only way to free memory is to reset the arena. This is different than calling malloc() to allocate each node individually and then having to call free(). It makes it easy to measure memory usage: check the arena size after parsing. It also allows optimization tricks like compressing pointers. How I measured bun cmd/bench.ts markdown parses 64 KB of markdown in four shapes and reports the arena bytes the parse allocated: prose — paragraphs, emphasis, links nested lists — deep blockquotes and lists gfm tables — tables all the way down entities — text that is mostly &amp;-style character references The number is the whole arena: nodes, the tokenizer’s event list, and the strings. Not just sizeof(Node) × node count. We also measure parsing time to make sure we don’t trade size for speed. Baseline, 64 KB of source: prose 1646.1 KB (25.7× the source) nested lists 1067.9 KB gfm tables 2926.0 KB entities 660.2 KB 1. Pointer compression for strings (bed71ee) On 64-bit platforms, pointers are 8 bytes. Pointer compression reduces this to 4 bytes by calculating a 32-bit offset against a base pointer. Google used compressed pointers in v8 with great result. Reduced memory usage and increased speed. Our string type is the simplest possible string: struct Str { char* data; size_t len; }; That’s at least 12 bytes per string, if len is 4 bytes. Due to alignment, the size is 16 bytes. Strings are allocated in Arena so we can use the beginning of an arena as a base pointer and optimize the pointer from 8 bytes to 4 bytes. We typedef ArenaStr as uint64_t. The lower 4 bytes is uint32_t compressed pointer and upper uint32_t is size. We reduced the overhead of strings from 16 bytes to 8 bytes. Times 8 strings that’s 64 bytes saved per node. Added helper functions for allocating ArenaStr in arena and converting ArenaStr to Str. Savings: 8 strings * 8 bytes, 64 bytes per node: 232 → 168 bytes. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 1646.1 KB 1285.9 KB -21.9% -21.9% nested lists 1067.9 KB 1067.9 KB 867.5 KB -18.8% -18.8% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 2926.0 KB 2269.7 KB -22.4% -22.4% entities 660.2 KB 660.2 KB 626.2 KB -5.1% -5.1% 2. Growing arena strings in place (a9d4f3a) Some strings had to grow. Arena allocator doesn’t provide freeing or reallocation. You can only allocate new strings, which wastes memory by leaving dead copies of the string we were appending to. We can grow the last allocated string and that’s what this change does. Luckily, most appends were done to the last string. ArenaStrAppend checks whether the string ends exactly where the arena’s next allocation would begin. If it does, the new bytes are pushed straight onto it and nothing is copied. Decoding HTML entities (e.g. &amp;) broke that optimization by doing an allocation before appending to the string. We switched to decoding entities into a 4-byte stack buffer which enabled optimized append. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 1285.9 KB 1285.9 KB +0.0% -21.9% nested lists 1067.9 KB 867.5 KB 729.2 KB -15.9% -31.7% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 2269.7 KB 2269.7 KB +0.0% -22.4% entities 660.2 KB 626.2 KB 163.8 KB -73.8% -75.2% 3. Re-order struct fields, pack the bools (5c0ce6e) Unless told to pack the layout of the struct, C++ compilers align struct fields to the size of the largest primitive type. If you sandwich a bool between 2 uint64_t values, the bool will occupy 8 bytes (sizeof(uint64_t)) instead of 1 byte as it should. Our Node had such wasted space due to padding. My friend Claude was careless. A simple fix is to re-arrange fields, putting the largest first. We also had six bool field which we packed into a uint8_t flags field. Result: 168 → 144 bytes, with no padding at all. We’re beating Rust version now. declaration order: bool after vector = 7 bytes of padding, six times over vector b padding strings b padding largest first, bools in one byte: no padding vectors strings nums f shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 1285.9 KB 1150.9 KB -10.5% -30.1% nested lists 1067.9 KB 729.2 KB 654.0 KB -10.3% -38.8% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 2269.7 KB 2023.6 KB -10.8% -30.8% entities 660.2 KB 163.8 KB 151.0 KB -7.8% -77.1% Free bytes: same fields, same code, different order. 4. Pointer compression for everything (07ec80f) We compress pointer for all objects allocated in the arena, like we compressed a pointer to the string. ArenaVec<Node*> children held 8-byte addresses; ArenaPtr<T> is a 4-byte offset into the arena’s position space, resolved by ArenaAtOffset. Zero is null, which costs nothing because no allocation ever lands at offset zero. The Node itself doesn’t change size — a vector handle is the same three words whatever it holds — so all of the saving is in the child arrays. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 1150.9 KB 1091.9 KB -5.1% -33.7% nested lists 1067.9 KB 654.0 KB 611.6 KB -6.5% -42.7% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 2023.6 KB 1866.9 KB -7.7% -36.2% entities 660.2 KB 151.0 KB 144.9 KB -4.0% -78.1% These shapes rank by children-per-node rather than by node count, which is why tables moved most. 5. Varint encoding string length (f9ebc34) ArenaStr was an offset and a length in 8 bytes. Now it’s the offset alone — 4 bytes — and the length is varint-encoded at the beginning of the string data: [varint len][string bytes][NUL] There are many varint encoding schemes. This one is for unsigned number and codes number < 128 as a single byte. Most strings are below that threshold, so they use a single byte for the varint length, saving roughly 3 bytes per string. Node shrinks from 144 → 112 bytes. Str — pointer + length, 16 bytes per field char* s int64 len ArenaStr — offset + length, 8 bytes u32 off u32 len ArenaStr — offset alone, 4 bytes; the length lives in the arena u32 off len characters 0 Caveat: An offset-and-length string can point at a slice of another string, and a length-prefixed one can’t. We weren’t doing it so it doesn’t apply here. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 1091.9 KB 918.0 KB -15.9% -44.2% nested lists 1067.9 KB 611.6 KB 512.3 KB -16.2% -52.0% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 1866.9 KB 1543.6 KB -17.3% -47.2% entities 660.2 KB 144.9 KB 128.5 KB -11.3% -80.5% 6. Fusing exclusive fields (5467a18) A List has a start number. A Heading has a depth. No node is ever both, so they became one uint32_t startOrDepth and kind says which it means. It didn’t shrink the size of Node due to the alignment padding but we did it anyway hoping that future optimization would shrink below padding. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 918.0 KB 918.0 KB +0.0% -44.2% nested lists 1067.9 KB 512.3 KB 512.3 KB +0.0% -52.0% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 1543.6 KB 1543.6 KB +0.0% -47.2% entities 660.2 KB 128.5 KB 128.5 KB +0.0% -80.5% 7. Compressing text position (ed5e807) Each Node carried the info about its position in parsed text. It was expensive because it was stored as start and end fields and each of them was: a uint32_t line a uint32_t column a uint32_t offset That’s 4*3*2 = 24 bytes. I assume this info is for debugging so not important for me. I replaced it with 2 uint32_t offsets into a source markdown string, srcStart and srcEnd. We can reconstruct the line/column position from that and the source string. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 918.0 KB 828.0 KB -9.8% -49.7% nested lists 1067.9 KB 512.3 KB 462.2 KB -9.8% -56.7% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 1543.6 KB 1379.6 KB -10.6% -52.9% entities 660.2 KB 128.5 KB 120.0 KB -6.6% -81.8% 8. Further compression text position (6a558c4) srcEnd is always after srcStart so we can delta-encode it and shrink to uint16_t. What if it’s bigger than 64 KB? I don’t care, we store it as 65535. This is another case where due to padding we didn’t shrink the struct size. But wait for it. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 828.0 KB 828.0 KB +0.0% -49.7% nested lists 1067.9 KB 462.2 KB 462.2 KB +0.0% -56.7% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 1379.6 KB 1379.6 KB +0.0% -52.9% entities 660.2 KB 120.0 KB 120.0 KB +0.0% -81.8% 9. Optimizing storing children (d6c4abc) Some nodes have children that were stored as a growable vector. Empty vector was 24 bytes in the node. We replaced it with a ring of compressed pointers: the parent names its last child, each child names the next one, and the last child wraps back to the first. vector: 24 bytes in the node + a separate array of links ptr · len · cap kid0 kid1 kid2 spare spare ring: 4 bytes in the parent, 4 in each child, nothing else allocated parent kid0 kid1 kid2 lastKid We use a ring and not just a linked list because appending is the only thing the parser does to a child list. A single linked list requires walking the list to find the end, while a ring does not. Saving: 96 → 80 bytes. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 828.0 KB 619.0 KB -25.2% -62.4% nested lists 1067.9 KB 462.2 KB 308.8 KB -33.2% -71.1% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 1379.6 KB 898.7 KB -34.9% -69.3% entities 660.2 KB 120.0 KB 98.9 KB -17.6% -85.0% Caveat: accessing a child by index would require a walk through the ring, so indexing in a loop would be quadratic. In our code we only ask for the first or the last. 10. Compressing table alignments info (ca0818c) For tables we were storing column alignments in a separate vector on every node, even though only Table nodes have them. Another 24 bytes per node. We switched to a compressed pointer which points to an optimized representation of the column alignments. There are four alignments (left, right, center, none), so a column needs 2 bits: [varint count][2 bits a column, four to a byte] The whole list is known when the table is entered, so it’s counted, allocated once and filled. For an 8-column table that’s 3 bytes in the arena and a 4-byte offset in the node. Saving: 80 → 60 bytes. We saved more than the 20 bytes because with the last pointer-holding member gone alignof(Node) fell from 8 to 4. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 619.0 KB 519.3 KB -16.1% -68.5% nested lists 1067.9 KB 308.8 KB 256.3 KB -17.0% -76.0% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 898.7 KB 710.3 KB -21.0% -75.7% entities 660.2 KB 98.9 KB 89.2 KB -9.8% -86.5% The block is pushed byte-aligned rather than through the general allocator, which rounds to 8 and would have handed back exactly what the varint saved. 11. Fusing exclusive fields (07444d6) Previously we fused exclusive fields start of a List node and depth of a Heading node into a single uint32_t. We fused Table node column alignments info from previous optimization into the same field. We called it uint32_t perKind, and kind says what kind of value it is. Saving: 60 → 56 bytes. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 519.3 KB 483.9 KB -6.8% -70.6% nested lists 1067.9 KB 256.3 KB 233.7 KB -8.8% -78.1% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 710.3 KB 646.1 KB -9.0% -77.9% entities 660.2 KB 89.2 KB 86.1 KB -3.5% -87.0% 12. Optimizing eight strings (521e32e) We had 8 strings that were not all used by all nodes. Instead of figuring out how many strings we need at most, I created a linked list of strings in the arena. They are different than regular strings in that they carry a 4 byte compressed pointer to the next string within the arena and the kind of the strings. [u32 next][u8 kind][varint len][len bytes][NUL] We can add as many kinds of strings as we need but we only pay for used strings + 5 byte per-string overhead. Some nodes don’t have any strings. 8 fields: 32 bytes on every node, 7 of them empty on almost all of them value url title alt ident label lang meta 1 field: 4 bytes, and a record only for what the node actually carries first next kind len characters 0 a stored string costs 5 bytes more · a node storing none saves 28 New records go on the head, so storing is O(1), and the walk that finds a kind is at most 8 long and is almost always 1 or 0. In-place growth still works, because a record being the newest thing in the arena is the same condition it always was. Saving: 56 → 28 bytes. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 483.9 KB 358.3 KB -26.0% -78.2% nested lists 1067.9 KB 233.7 KB 159.1 KB -31.9% -85.1% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 646.1 KB 402.9 KB -37.6% -86.2% entities 660.2 KB 86.1 KB 73.7 KB -14.4% -88.8% 13. Fusing two enums into one (f3c14b9) As it happened we had two enums: one needed 6 bits another needed 2 bits We fused them from 2 bytes to 1 byte. Because this 1 byte saving dropped below padding we saved 4 bytes and went from 28 → 24 bytes. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 358.3 KB 321.2 KB -10.4% -80.5% nested lists 1067.9 KB 159.1 KB 136.5 KB -14.2% -87.2% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 402.9 KB 341.9 KB -15.1% -88.3% entities 660.2 KB 73.7 KB 70.4 KB -4.5% -89.3% 14. Remove position, reduce allocator’s alignment (861c803) At this point I decided that I didn’t need the position so I removed it. Other markdown parsers don’t carry it around so it doesn’t seem very useful. I reduced overhead of perKind by converting it to a record in the string list from step 12 — varint-encoded, under its own kind byte. A List, Heading or Table pays ~8 bytes for it; every other node pays nothing, where a field cost 4 bytes on all of them. Savings: 24 → 16 bytes. For safety arena allocator aligns allocations to 8 bytes but a 16 bytes Node can be allocated at 4 bytes, which we did. This reduces wasted space between allocations. shape start before after vs before vs start prose 1646.1 KB 321.2 KB 272.0 KB -15.3% -83.5% nested lists 1067.9 KB 136.5 KB 110.2 KB -19.3% -89.7% gfm tables 2926.0 KB 341.9 KB 250.5 KB -26.7% -91.4% entities 660.2 KB 70.4 KB 65.6 KB -6.8% -90.1% End results The results are pretty dramatic: sizeof(Node) prose nested tables entities start 232 1646.1 KB 1067.9 KB 2926.0 KB 660.2 KB end 16 272.0 KB 110.2 KB 250.5 KB 65.6 KB -93% -83.5% -89.7% -91.4% -90.1% A parse of 64 KB of prose cost 25.7× the source in arena bytes. It costs 4.2× now. The entities shape went from 10.3× to 1.02×. The speed was unchanged. Fastest of 3 runs: prose 8.47 → 8.22 ms nested 9.45 → 9.26 ms tables 12.88 → 12.92 ms entities 5.90 → 5.85 ms Those are within margin of error. The phase of building the tree got a measurable speed up: 0.397 → 0.302 ms, about 24% faster. This is from allocating less and touching fewer cache lines. This is not visible on micro benchmarks, but using less memory will slightly speed up the rest of the application. Lessons learned Arranging struct fields by size is good. It costs literally nothing. Pointer compression is good. 8 bytes become 4 bytes and the cost of converting back and forth is negligible, as Google shown in their v8 blog post and is re-inforced by our benchmarks Varint-encoding is good. Most strings are short so varint encoding can save 3 bytes per string on average. Moving rare fields out of line is good. The way we reduced 8 strings into an out-of-line list. Only pays off if savings is bigger than the cost of additional metadata. sizeof only drops when the saving crosses an alignment boundary. Two of our changes didn’t reduce size of Node struct but it paid off in later optimizations. The allocator’s alignment is part of sizeof. A 28-byte struct from an 8-aligned bump allocator is 32 bytes. We need benchmarks. You can’t improve what you can’t measure. Our benchmarks measured both memory usage and speed, to ensure we didn’t regress speed to save memory.

22nd Aug 2026 • 2 votes
Speeding up JavaScript function with AI help

A new JavaScript library pretext for fast text measuring / layout popped up on social media. Potentially interesting given its focus on speeding up text rendering in web apps and me writing web apps and liking them being fast. I looked at the code and saw a function isCJK(). Given my 3 decades of programming and performance optimization, it looked like it could be sped up. This is a story about ideas on making JavaScript faster and the process of quickly implementing and benchmarking them. The code export function isCJK(s: string): boolean { for (const ch of s) { const c = ch.codePointAt(0)! if ((c >= 0x4E00 && c <= 0x9FFF) || (c >= 0x3400 && c <= 0x4DBF) || (c >= 0x20000 && c <= 0x2A6DF) || (c >= 0x2A700 && c <= 0x2B73F) || (c >= 0x2B740 && c <= 0x2B81F) || (c >= 0x2B820 && c <= 0x2CEAF) || (c >= 0x2CEB0 && c <= 0x2EBEF) || (c >= 0x30000 && c <= 0x3134F) || (c >= 0xF900 && c <= 0xFAFF) || (c >= 0x2F800 && c <= 0x2FA1F) || (c >= 0x3000 && c <= 0x303F) || (c >= 0x3040 && c <= 0x309F) || (c >= 0x30A0 && c <= 0x30FF) || (c >= 0xAC00 && c <= 0xD7AF) || (c >= 0xFF00 && c <= 0xFFEF)) { return true } } return false } My spider sense tingling To make code run fast you have to have mechanical sympathy. You need a good mental model of how CPUs and programming languages work, at the low level. Because I have mechanical sympathy, I know that to evaluate multiple || statements, the program has to check every statement until it finds one that is true. For the case of not matching any range, it has to do all 15 comparisons. My immediate thought was that most characters are ascii (non-cjk) and therefore require 15 comparisons. An early exit should speed things up: if (c < 0x300) continue;. It adds 1 comparison for matching cases but removes 14 (15 - 1) for the most common case of ascii characters. Hunch is good, benchmark is better Micro-benchmarking is subtle. In the past I would google for a JavaScript benchmarking library and trust that it’s sound. Claude wrote a sound, simple benchmark function: function bench(name, fn, iterations = 1_000_000) { for (let i = 0; i < 10_000; i++) fn(); // warmup const start = performance.now(); for (let i = 0; i < iterations; i++) fn(); const elapsed = performance.now() - start; const opsPerSec = ((iterations / elapsed) * 1000).toFixed(0); console.log(`${name}: ${elapsed.toFixed(2)} ms (${opsPerSec} ops/sec)`); } // to call: bench("isCJKRegex ", () => isCJKRegex(input)); The subtle part is warmup phase. JavaScript JIT engines that you’re likely to use (v8 in Chrome, JavaScriptCore in Safari, SpiderMonkey in FireFox) have several optimization tiers and only do most aggressive optimization for frequently called functions. The warmup phase forces JIT to compile fn with most aggressive settings. This is only fair - I assume isCJK is called frequently. If it wasn’t, there’s no point sweating to optimize it. The new AI normal In the past I would have to manually implement each optimization idea. With AI I can delegate the coding and therefore test more ideas. The following was done with Claude 4.6. 100% vibe coding There are levels of delegating things to AI. On the extreme side of giving up control is 100% vibe coding. I had 2 ideas for performance optimization: early exit replace 15 linear checks with binary search But what if I didn’t? What if I just ask AI to come up with ideas? The following is my conversation with Claude 4.6 and what I’ve learned. I created is_cjk.js file and pasted the original function. look at is_cjk.js. come up with 2 ideas for how to speed up isCJK(). Implement those as separate functions and write a javascript micro-benchmark that compares those 2 new implementations against isCJK Two ideas: Pre-compiled regex — push the entire check into the native regex engine, avoiding JS-level for…of iteration and codePointAt() overhead. Typed array bitmap for BMP — for BMP characters (the vast majority of real text), a Uint8Array bitmap gives O(1) lookup with a single array access. Fall back to range checks only for supplementary plane characters. I have to admit: I recognize those as valid optimization ideas but they didn’t immediately occur to me. Regex works because regex implementations in JavaScript engines are insanely optimized. Bitmap is a known optimization for doing true/false lookup for numbers. Let’s say you have total range 0-255 and you want a function that checks if a number is in range 1-10, 20-30, 40-50, 60-70, 80-90. That’s 5 if statements, each doing 2 comparisons. You can instead use 1 bit for each of the 256 numbers (i.e. 256⁄8 = 32 bytes), pre-compute the array of bytes and set the bit for the ranges. Then lookup is just math to get byte offset and bit, load the byte, check the bit. Super fast. Claude not only wrote the benchmark function, 2 new implementations but also ran the benchmarks using node and showed me results in a readable way. The bitmap approach was significantly faster. Human assisted coding Bitmap was the fastest and yet I discarded it using my human judgement. The bitmap needed 65kB of memory and that’s just too much for this function. That’s where human judgement comes in to improve collaboration with AI. I didn’t specify that I also care about memory usage so AI wrote fast code that was using too much memory. You’re benchmarking what? Here’s another tricky part of benchmarking: knowing what you benchmark. There are 3 popular JavaScript engines. Claude ran benchmarks using node which uses Chrome’s v8. That’s good because that’s the most popular browser and therefore most popular JavaScript JIT engine. It’s also good to sanity-check with at least one other JavaScript engine. bun uses Safari’s JavaScriptCore so I asked Claude: run the tests using bun The results were similar, which is good. We don’t want code that is fast in one engine but slow in another. We don’t control which browser the user of our code is running. Continuing collaboration with AI I had some more ideas so here’s the rest of my conversation with Claude. don’t benchmark bitmap, it uses too much memory; write a variant of isCJK that does an early false exit if char is less than smallest Early exit is my first insight I wanted to test. As expected, early exit is good 2x speedup for latin strings, although regex beats it on cjk strings. That is the curse of engineering trade-offs: you have to decide if you want to optimize for cjk strings or non-cjk strings. now implement a variant that does inline bisect / binary search That was my second idea: do a binary search instead of sequential if comparisons. It was faster than original but slower than regex / early exit. Also, Claude didn’t do what I meant. It stored the ranges as array: // Flat array: [lo0, hi0, lo1, hi1, ...] sorted by lo const cjkRanges = new Uint32Array([ 0x3000, 0x303f, 0x3040, 0x309f, ... That’s what I meant: implement a variant isCJBisect that doesn’t use array but unrolls binary search logic into if statements The implementation is gnarly: function inCJKUnrolled(c) { if (c < 0x3000) return false; if (c < 0xff00) { if (c < 0x3400) { if (c < 0x3040) { return c <= 0x303f; } else if (c > 0x309f) { return c >= 0x30a0 && c <= 0x30ff; } return true; // ... more gnarly code But what do I care? Claude wrote it. Arguably it’s hard for me to review for correctness but it’s perfectly testable. We can write a test to compare if it returns the same result as original function for every possible input. As expected, unrolled version was faster than array-based but not always faster than regex or early exit. But Claude wrote something that caught my eye: The for…of + codePointAt iterator overhead remains the bottleneck shared by all non-regex variants on long strings. It’s well known that for ... of loop is slower than for (let i = 0; i < n; i++). It’s one of those things that you need to know. I knew this but I didn’t connect the dots in this particular case. write variant of isCJKEarly which replaces for of with a faster loop Result: isCJKEarlyFast crushes everything across the board on both runtimes The code for isCKJEarlyFast. Looks like we have a winner: Replacing for…of + codePointAt() with charCodeAt() + index loop eliminates the iterator overhead, which was the main bottleneck. The early c < 0x3000 bail then skips all range checks for ASCII/latin characters cheaply. Only regex still wins on Node’s long latin miss case thanks to V8’s native string scanning. There’s a subtlety that makes the rewrite of for .. of into for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) tricky. Logically JavaScript strings are composed from 16-bit numbers (characters). Some Unicode code-points are bigger than 16-bit and are stored as 2 16-bit numbers, called surrogate pairs. So writing a loop over unicode codepoints needs to take this into account. It’s tricky code but again, what do I care? Claude wrote it and it’s perfectly testable. Pressing on The good thing about claude writing most of the code and removing other tedium like running the benchmarks is that we can do more in the same amount of time. So I explored even more. I noticed: export function isCJKUnrolled(s) { for (const ch of s) { if (inCJKUnrolled(ch.codePointAt(0))) return true; } return false; } What happens when inCJKUnrolled is inlined? inline inCJKUnrolled into isCJKUnrolled Result: Done. Inlining didn’t help — it actually got slightly slower in most cases (the engine was already inlining the small function). No change in rankings; EarlyFast remains the winner. Turns out it’s not faster, which was surprising. Inlining is supposed to remove overhead of function calls, which matters in loops. Surprising isn’t bad. We run benchmarks to validate our hunches. For completness, I wanted to compare with original where for .. of was rewritten. also write original with for of replaced by standard for loop and bench all and give results as markdown table Claude was nice enough to show benchmark results in a nicely formatted table, without me even asking. It just knows things. But as you can see above, you can ask it for results in markdown table to e.g. include in a GitHub bug report. Here are final results. The number is operations/second in millions. Higher is better. Bun Scenario Original Regex Early Bisect Unrolled EarlyFast ForLoop Single CJK 11M 22M 12M 12M 16M 79M 57M Single latin 20M 24M 49M 21M 22M 40M 36M CJK string 12M 18M 17M 12M 14M 42M 42M Latin string 1.5M 4.7M 3.6M 3.0M 3.5M 17M 6.5M Mixed string 6.5M 5.9M 9.9M 8.6M 13M 62M 34M Node Scenario Original Regex Early Bisect Unrolled EarlyFast ForLoop Single CJK 85M 54M 51M 44M 56M 112M 110M Single latin 59M 72M 83M 55M 74M 115M 103M CJK string 79M 55M 60M 55M 64M 90M 129M Latin string 4.2M 57M 4.3M 2.8M 4.5M 12M 8.3M Mixed string 14M 15M 16M 10M 15M 41M 38M Conclusions AI is a big unlock. It took me under 30 minutes to test various hypotheses and find out a significant speed up. Without Claude it would take several hours and I would likely not do it at all. It’s just not important enough to spend a working day on it. To get best results we still need to apply human judgement and guide the AI. Programming expert knowledge An expert is simply someone who knows things. We know things because we learn them. If you were paying attention you might have learned the following things: importance of warmup phase when benchmarking JIT compilers for .. of is slower than for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) regex matching in JavaScript engines is fast subtlety of surrogate pairs in JavaScript strings using bitmaps to speed up range lookups Resources All the code is in https://gist.github.com/kjk/bdbea9d90c3bb0454fbe26353c521bfd I like to write fast code. If you want a fast bookmark manager / note taker, try MarkLexis. If you want a fast PDF / ebook / comic book reader for Windows, try SumatraPDF.

29th Mar 2026 • 1 votes
How to run msvc cl.exe from command-line (powershell)

So you’ve installed Visual Studio and you want to run the compiler cl.exe from command-line. Microsoft makes it surprisingly hard. They give you a shortcut which opens a terminal window with cmd.exe setup for compilation. But I don’t want a separate window, I want to use the terminal app. You can run cmd.exe /k "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Auxiliary\Build\vcvarsall.bat" x64 (location for your setup can be different). But I don’t want to run inside cmd.exe. I want to use powershell. What exactly does vcvarsall.bat do? Not much: it just sets some env variables and updates PATH. We can reverse-engineer what it does: cmd.exe set >before.txt cmd.exe /k "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Auxiliary\Build\vcvarsall.bat" x64 set >after.txt Now compare before.txt and after.txt to see what changed. I asked AI to do it for me and here’s the beginning of what I found: CommandPromptType=Native DevEnvDir=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\ ExtensionSdkDir=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows Kits\10\ExtensionSDKs EXTERNAL_INCLUDE=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\ATLMFC\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Auxiliary\VS\include;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\include\10.0.26100.0\ucrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\um;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\shared;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\winrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\cppwinrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\NETFXSDK\4.8\include\um Framework40Version=v4.0 FrameworkDir=C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\ FrameworkDir64=C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\ ... more stuff I saved that to diff.txt file. Now that we have that we can ask our friendly AI to convert this to a powershell function: write powershell function that sets variables as seen in @diff.txt I get something like this: function set-msvc { <# .SYNOPSIS Sets Visual Studio Developer Command Prompt environment variables. .DESCRIPTION This function sets all the environment variables needed for Visual Studio 2022 native x64 development, equivalent to running vcvars64.bat. .EXAMPLE Set-VsDevEnv #> [CmdletBinding()] param() $env:CommandPromptType = "Native" $env:DevEnvDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\" ... more stuff We need to change one thing: $env::PATH from absolute to just adding paths to current $env::PATH so that it’ll adapt to future changes in PATH. Now add that to $PROFILE and you can type set-msvc to setup powershell to have access to cl.exe, msbuild and other tools. Below is the whole function but note that this is only for amd64 toolset. For 32-bit or arm setup would be different. You can get by re-running the above logic for vcvarsall.bat with different arguments. function set-msvc { <# .SYNOPSIS Sets Visual Studio Developer Command Prompt environment variables. .DESCRIPTION This function sets all the environment variables needed for Visual Studio 2022 native x64 development, equivalent to running vcvars64.bat. .EXAMPLE Set-VsDevEnv #> [CmdletBinding()] param() $env:CommandPromptType = "Native" $env:DevEnvDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\" $env:ExtensionSdkDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows Kits\10\ExtensionSDKs" $env:EXTERNAL_INCLUDE = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\ATLMFC\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Auxiliary\VS\include;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\include\10.0.26100.0\ucrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\um;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\shared;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\winrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\cppwinrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\NETFXSDK\4.8\include\um" $env:Framework40Version = "v4.0" $env:FrameworkDir = "C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\" $env:FrameworkDir64 = "C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\" $env:FrameworkVersion = "v4.0.30319" $env:FrameworkVersion64 = "v4.0.30319" $env:FSHARPINSTALLDIR = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\FSharp\Tools" $env:HTMLHelpDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\HTML Help Workshop" $env:INCLUDE = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\ATLMFC\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Auxiliary\VS\include;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\include\10.0.26100.0\ucrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\um;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\shared;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\winrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\include\10.0.26100.0\\cppwinrt;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\NETFXSDK\4.8\include\um" $env:is_x64_arch = "true" $env:LIB = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\ATLMFC\lib\x64;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\lib\x64;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\NETFXSDK\4.8\lib\um\x64;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\lib\10.0.26100.0\ucrt\x64;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\\lib\10.0.26100.0\\um\x64" $env:LIBPATH = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\ATLMFC\lib\x64;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\lib\x64;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\lib\x86\store\references;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\UnionMetadata\10.0.26100.0;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\References\10.0.26100.0;C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319" $env:NETFXSDKDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\NETFXSDK\4.8\" $env:Path = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\bin\HostX64\x64;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\VC\VCPackages;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\TestWindow;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\TeamFoundation\Team Explorer;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\MSBuild\Current\bin\Roslyn;C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v10.0A\bin\NETFX 4.8 Tools\x64\;C:\Program Files (x86)\HTML Help Workshop;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\FSharp\Tools;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Team Tools\DiagnosticsHub\Collector;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\Llvm\x64\bin;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\bin\10.0.26100.0\\x64;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\bin\\x64;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\\MSBuild\Current\Bin\amd64;C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\Tools\;" + $env::Path + ";C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\CMake\CMake\bin;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\CommonExtensions\Microsoft\CMake\Ninja;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\VC\Linux\bin\ConnectionManagerExe;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\vcpkg" $env:Platform = "x64" $env:UCRTVersion = "10.0.26100.0" $env:UniversalCRTSdkDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\" $env:VCIDEInstallDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\IDE\VC\" $env:VCINSTALLDIR = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\" $env:VCPKG_ROOT = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\vcpkg" $env:VCToolsInstallDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.44.35207\" $env:VCToolsRedistDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Redist\MSVC\14.44.35112\" $env:VCToolsVersion = "14.44.35207" $env:VisualStudioVersion = "17.0" $env:VS170COMNTOOLS = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\Common7\Tools\" $env:VSCMD_ARG_app_plat = "Desktop" $env:VSCMD_ARG_HOST_ARCH = "x64" $env:VSCMD_ARG_TGT_ARCH = "x64" $env:VSCMD_VER = "17.14.24" $env:VSINSTALLDIR = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\" $env:WindowsLibPath = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\UnionMetadata\10.0.26100.0;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\References\10.0.26100.0" $env:WindowsSdkBinPath = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\bin\" $env:WindowsSdkDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\" $env:WindowsSDKLibVersion = "10.0.26100.0\" $env:WindowsSdkVerBinPath = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\bin\10.0.26100.0\" $env:WindowsSDKVersion = "10.0.26100.0\" $env:WindowsSDK_ExecutablePath_x64 = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v10.0A\bin\NETFX 4.8 Tools\x64\" $env:WindowsSDK_ExecutablePath_x86 = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v10.0A\bin\NETFX 4.8 Tools\" $env:__DOTNET_ADD_64BIT = "1" $env:__DOTNET_PREFERRED_BITNESS = "64" $env:__VSCMD_PREINIT_PATH = "C:\Program Files\PowerShell\7;C:\Windows\system32;C:\Windows;C:\Windows\System32\Wbem;C:\Windows\System32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\;C:\Windows\System32\OpenSSH\;C:\Program Files\Microsoft VS Code\bin;c:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\cursor\resources\app\bin;C:\Program Files\gs\gs10.03.1\bin;C:\WINDOWS\system32;C:\WINDOWS;C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem;C:\WINDOWS\System32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\;C:\WINDOWS\System32\OpenSSH\;C:\Program Files\GitHub CLI\;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\10\Windows Performance Toolkit\;C:\Program Files\Rust stable MSVC 1.88\bin;C:\Program Files\PowerShell\7\;C:\Program Files\nodejs\;C:\Program Files\dotnet\;C:\Program Files\CMake\bin;C:\Program Files\Go\bin;C:\Program Files\RedHat\Podman\;C:\Program Files\Tailscale\;C:\Program Files\Git\cmd;C:\Program Files\Docker\Docker\resources\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WinGet\Links;C:\Users\kjk\.bun\bin;C:\Users\kjk\.dotnet\tools;C:\Users\kjk\go\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\superfile\;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\GitHubDesktop\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\cursor\resources\app\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Roaming\npm;C:\Users\kjk\.dotnet\tools;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\Antigravity\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\Zed\bin;C:\Users\kjk\go\bin;C:\Users\kjk\OneDrive\bin;C:\Users\kjk\.bin\jai\bin;C:\Users\kjk\.bin\mupdf-1.27.0;C:\Users\kjk\.local\bin;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Programs\WinMerge;C:\Users\kjk\AppData\Local\Packages\PythonSoftwareFoundation.Python.3.12_qbz5n2kfra8p0\LocalCache\local-packages\Python312\Scripts;C:\Users\kjk\OneDrive\bin\sublime_text" Write-Host "Visual Studio 2022 Developer Environment configured for x64." -ForegroundColor Green }

16th Jan 2026 • 1 votes

More in programming

BazelCon 2026 recap

My now-traditional “summary” of the conference along with my own commentary and thoughts.

13 hours ago • 1 votes
The Future of CSS ✨

Every year, browser vendors collaborate via the Interop project to synchronize their efforts on new HTML/CSS/JS features. This year, there’s a ton of super exciting features being considered! In this blog post, we’ll explore the CSS of the future, to get a glimpse of what we’ll soon be able to do.

2 days ago • 1 votes
Speeding up code review with `small-change`

Imprint’s average engineer is merging 4x more PRs than 2 years ago. Yay. Aggregated behind the average is something even more interesting: we have two teams that are merging 10x their PRs over that period. One engineer is merging 25x the PRs per week of our average engineer two years ago, and a number are merging 10x. That’s pretty neat, and the slope of the line suggests our average in a year is going to look much closer to today’s p90 than today’s p50. Even more importantly, we aren’t just shipping more, our quality has improved: incidents are down 42% half-over-half, and critical incidents are down 78% half-over-half. I think we’ve always known the quality/velocity tradeoff wasn’t a particularly useful construct, but that’s undeniable today. As we’ve walked this path, we–like everyone else progressing down it–have run into the problem of pull request review. The p50 pull request review took about 33 minutes to complete 2 years ago, but now takes us about 77 minutes. The slope here correlates tightly with the number of pull requests getting merged. Tightly enough that addressing it became one of my priorities for the week. We solved it! Just kidding, we’ve absolutely not solved it, but I think our current approach is an interesting one, which we call the small-change. The work discussed here was shaped and done by many folks at Imprint including Dan, Joy, Daniel, Lenny, Taylor, Ted, and Annie, among many others. Why review pull requests? There are four reasons we review pull requests: Knowledge sharing between author and reviewer – software engineering is generally learned via apprenticeship, and reviews are a primary mechanism of experienced engineers teaching others what good software looks like. We believe the current volume means that this knowledge sharing will have to move towards operating on clusters of pull requests, rather than individual pull requests Preventing errors – review has always been an expensive time to catch errors, and we believe that effective CICD along with harness verification techniques like poteto’s pstack are more effective mechanisms for preventing errors than review Preventing malicious behavior – my experience is that even careful code review will generally miss competent malicious behavior, although fortunately most malicious behavior is incompetent. We believe both sorts of behavior are best identified using a combination of fixed rules (modifying these specific objects/classes/files requires review), anti-abuse mechanisms that we’ve refined in our LLM-based member support experiences, auditing, and audit log inspection Compliance obligations in our documented controls – these can be changed, but today they require that an independent human reviews changes in a subset of our repositories In the modern development paradigm, we think there is a better solution for each of these problems. But, we also want to make these changes very cautiously. Small steps with small-change We believe we move fast by finding narrow, contained ways to validate new practices, so to iterate our way into an effective solution, we’ve developed the concept of a small-change. Here’s how it works: When a pull request is marked ready, CICD determines whether it is eligible to be a small-change. This is represented as a passing Github check. There is also a label for visibility, but it is the check itself, managed by the build and not human modifiable, that determines eligibility. (The label is used for initial filtering, but the check is still independently verified.) Something is a small-change if it meets all of these criteria: It is less than 1,000 lines of code There are no p1 or p2 findings from our ai-code-review automated review bot The author has “experience” in the service or application, defined as 10+ prior merged pull requests into that service or application’s directories. For changes working across multiple services or applications, the author must have experience in all of them to qualify Impacts fewer than N distinct services or applications. N is 1 on our frontend monorepo, and N is 3 in our backend monorepo, where typical changes will modify both a gRPC service and a common HTTP gateway Shared libraries and utilities files are not eligible for small-change Each repository has a .small_change file which allows per-path customization while we continue to tune the behaviors. For example, a service dealing with money movement can be excluded Our Slack automation tags every reference to a pull request with reacji labeling the state of that pull request, for example if it has failing tests, if it has been approved but tests are still running, or if it is ready to merge. We added a small-change reacji that indicates which of those pull requests meet the small-change criteria In our internal skills repository, we created two skills that have been distributed across harnesses: review-small-change which takes a list of repositories and reviews all open, non-draft, small-changes, including providing approval if they meet the review’s criteria (all checks pass including small-change check, and not touching on sensitive topics such as payments and security) review-pr-cluster which reviews batches of pull requests to identify common themes that came up, and suggest opportunities for discussion and adding verifications We set the social expectation that any error caused by a small-change is a failure in our system, and has to be solved at the system level: improvements to ai-code-review, to our verification mechanisms, to our CICD, to our harness, etc. This took about two days of infrequent attention to implement and rollout, although I imagine we will be tuning the knobs here for a long time. Maybe forever. fleet: centrally orchestrated harness I’ll briefly mention our other approach to reducing code review volume, which anchors on our centrally-orchestrated harness, fleet. (Which is similar to Stripe’s Minions although not following the one-shot approach in particular). We rely on fleet to implement and verify software in a highly controlled harness running in the cloud, with independent evaluation mechanisms to identify the correct number of independent reviewers for any given change. That number can be as low as one (e.g. fleet writes, one human reviews) for changes evaluated as safe. Results / next steps / reception I’ll be honest, it’s too early to give a useful result here. From early results, about 10% of changes qualify as a small-change. Those are now eligible for very fast approval, and generally get it unless they trip a flag, generally due to touching a security or money adjacent topic. While 10% is a small percentage, the core concept here is working, and ultimately will succeed or fail based on our ability to expand that percentage over the next few months in tandem with expanding our verification mechanisms to be increasingly comprehensive. This is ultimately going to fail or succeed depending on our ability to improve our verifications, which does require more difficult sorts of techniques to accomplish in low scale-complexity, high domain-complexity software than in the high scale-complexity, low domain-complexity products where many techniques like incremental rollouts are exceptionally effective. (Don’t get me wrong, they still work, they just provide less coverage when most users have different configuration and behavior.) Folks have not been uniformly excited about this, it’s a substantial change from how we’ve learned to be good engineers, and it’s uncomfortable to reevaluate whether a long-held best practice has become merely dogma. The most energizing part of the current cycle is that we get to reevaluate these practices we grew up on every week; the most painful part of the current cycle is that we’re likely to fall behind if we ever stop reevaluating them.

5 days ago • 1 votes
Building a Chestnut Launcher

The park near my house has lots of chestnuts and my kids have been collecting them like crazy (it’s actually their favorite post-school activity). We accumulated quite a hoard. I thought it would be fun to make a launcher so we had something to do with our new chestnut collection. I wanted to go with a very simple crossbow-style design (like the famous D2 item) using latex tubing and a leather pouch for holding the chestnuts. This is what I came up with. It launches chestnuts about 220 feet, and it’s simple enough to build in an afternoon. The frame is a 42 inch 2x2 and a spare IKEA bed slat for the crossbeam, glued and screwed together. A 3/8 inch eye bolt goes through each end of the crossbeam, and the latex tubing is tied to those and to the pouch from a leather shepherd’s sling. Tying the tubing was the fiddliest part. It has to be stretched while you wrap it with butcher’s twine, so I clamped a couple of scrap blocks to my workbench to hold it. I like this design because the tubing can be wrapped around the eye bolts to easily add more tension and power. The Trigger My favorite part of the design was that I decided to use an archery release like this one for the trigger. It provides a safe and reliable way to hold the tubing back, and it’s made to let go cleanly. I 3D printed a little housing that mounts the release securely to the back of the stock, and the release clips onto a loop of archery D-loop cord on the back of the pouch. Then I added a dowel for a rear grip and an old handle I had previously removed from my shop vac. How Well Does It Work? We tried it at the park and it works surprisingly well. Aimed at about 35 to 40 degrees, it sends our chestnuts (on the small side, about 10 to 15 grams) about 220 feet. Thanks to the archery release, we haven’t had a single misfire. I got curious and did some rough math. To go that far with air drag, the chestnuts are leaving at somewhere around 85 to 100 mph, which works out to about the same energy as a paintball. So safety glasses are important and you never point it at anyone. You can find the 3D print on Printables and a full build guide on Instructables. Make sure to always use it with adult supervision :)

5 days ago • 1 votes
Organising my cross-stitch patterns

I have a lot of digital cross-stitch patterns and until recently they were a mess. My “collection” was a series of several hundred PDFs, disorganised and spread across my disk. Recently, I was looking for a pattern and it took me several minutes to find it. I had a brief moment of panic, thinking that I’d lost it, and the website this pattern came from is long since gone. Fortunately it did turn up, but it was clear I had to organise my pattern collection. Some people would use apps like Pattern Keeper or Flosshaven, but I just created another static website on my media drive. This is what it looks like: The patterns are arranged in a masonry layout with a preview thumbnail for each pattern, which is normally the first page of the PDF. If a pattern has multiple files – for example, different files for colour and black-and-white printing – there’s a list of links below the thumbnail. I can also add a source link to where I bought the pattern, if I want to find more patterns by the same author. Internally, it’s structured like my other static websites. The metadata for the patterns is stored in a JavaScript file, and then I have an HTML page which renders that metadata in this visual design. My pattern collection doesn’t change very often, so I’m adding new files by hand. There are no sorting or filtering options, because my collection is small enough that they’re unnecessary. I can scroll through the entire list in less than a minute and find whatever I need. I’d like to start making my own clothes soon, and I expect to copy this design to store clothing patterns. This collection now sits alongside my saved bookmarks, podcasts, TV shows, and more. I can keep all my patterns organised, and I won’t lose them in the depths of my hard drive. Technical tricks There are a couple of technical pieces I’m quite pleased with in this process: Masonry layout. I love the cascading grid style of a masonry layout, and I think they’re great when you have variable-sized content – like my pattern cards. I’ve been using them for over a decade; screenshots of my early web apps show my experiments with David Desandro’s Masonry.js library. Masonry layouts are now a native feature of CSS called “Grid Lanes”, which is simpler and more performant than the JavaScript approach. I’m excited to use these layouts in even more places. Thumbnails of PDFs. Most digital postage patterns are shipped as PDFs, and I’m creating the thumbnail images with my create_thumbnail tool. I had to extend my tool to support PDFs, which turned out to be straightforward with the pdf_oxide crate. I’d not come across Oxide before, but it’s a cross-language library for working with PDFs, and I can imagine using it in future. A coloured stripe for the palette. In the metadata for each project, I have the complete list of DMC thread colours and the pattern dimensions. I have a lookup table that converts DMC thread colours to hex codes, and then I’m able to create a linear gradient in CSS to render a coloured stripe of the pattern colours. Here’s an example from a pattern with four colours: border-bottom: 12px solid transparent; border-image: linear-gradient( to right, #7a451f 0%, #7a451f 25%, #985e33 25%, #985e33 50%, #e4bb8e 50%, #e4bb8e 75%, #361f0e 75%, #361f0e 100% ) 1; Building the HTML, CSS, and JavaScript was very quick – I have notes on how I build my media sites, and I’ve done it plenty of times before. I threw together the initial prototype in less than 15 minutes. The longer part was finding all the PDFs scattered across my disk – but now that’s done, and I know exactly where to find my patterns. [If the formatting of this post looks odd in your feed reader, visit the original article]

a week ago • 1 votes
📚 BoredReading

You seem to be enjoying this.

Join free to unlock everything.

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in