Hugging Face Transformers is your best bet. It's pretty straightforward and has solid docs, but you'll need to get your hands dirty a bit with setup and configs.

For squeezing every bit of performance out of your GPU, check out ONNX or TensorRT. They're not exactly plug-and-play, but they're getting easier to use.

And yeah, Docker can make life a bit easier by handling most of the setup mess for you. Just pull a container and you're more or less good to go.

It's not quite "idiot-proof" yet, but it's getting there. Just be ready to troubleshoot and tinker a bit.

It boils down to a few key points:

Mature Libraries: C++ has a treasure trove of well-established libraries. For niche or legacy needs, C++ might be your only option. Performance Control: When you need to micro-manage performance, C++ gives you the nitty-gritty control that can make all the difference. Industry Norms: In some fields like game development, C++ isn't just preferred, it's expected. Sticking to industry norms can sometimes outweigh the benefits of newer tech. So, while Rust has its perks, especially around safety and concurrency, C++ still holds its ground where its deep-rooted ecosystem and granular performance control come into play.

Microservices aren't just about breaking apps into pieces; they're about making each piece independently scalable, deployable, and manageable, which is huge for continuous deployment and integration. Sure, they add complexity, but for big, dynamic projects, that trade-off is worth it.

How does it enhance security and performance of virtualized environments compared to the standard VirtualBox kernel module?

Well, KVM is used by Google and AWS and others for their clouds. As such, there are a lot of eyes on KVM code. The vboxdrv kernel module that provides the same functionality in vanilla VBox definitely has fewer people looking at it. It also has anti-features, such as code upload from the userspace VirtualBox process to the kernel. This is also the largest security issue with vanilla VBox, because a lot of emulation code runs directly in the kernel.

From a performance perspective, it's a bit more complicated. KVM has support for modern virtualization features (Intel APICv, AMD AVIC, etc) that vanilla VBox lacks. You get these in the VirtualBox/KVM version. On the other hand, vanilla VBox emulates most devices in the kernel (see above). So SATA emulation in vanilla VBox is very fast compared to KVM/Qemu or KVM/VirtualBox for a bit unfair reasons. Modern devices, such as virtio or NVMe, are not as impacted by that.

tl;dr So the performance you get depends on your workload. If it's very interrupt heavy, VirtualBox/KVM will win. If it uses antiquated virtual devices (SATA), vanilla VirtualBox (with vboxdrv) will have an edge.

And could one swap between the two backends with the same VM image (.vbox +.vdi) to see which one gave the better performance?

Yes!

eBPF for in-kernel device emulation, then?

EDIT: That was a joke, but actually it is a thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTMls33dG8Q

How do you distinguish different encoding modes (numeric, alphanumeric, byte, etc.) within the data region, especially when dealing with a QR code that uses multiple encoding modes?

Each segment starts with a header that consists of a 4-bit type (numeric, alphanumeric, byte, etc.) and an n-bit character count.

Based on the comments here it looks like people are really attached to dashboards. I don't think dashboards are completely going away, but people are not using dashboards properly. There are too many dashboards in every org that no one uses. And definitely, we need something more interactive, that acts based on the end-goals that we need instead of drowning in charts.

That's a fair point. Big companies do have the resources to go all out, but that doesn't always mean their solutions are the best fit for everyone. I think Shoelace is pretty neat because it's more approachable for folks who aren't part of those mega-teams.

I'm impressed with the breadth of Shoelace's offerings, particularly its emphasis on accessibility and framework compatibility. For a project I'm working on, which involves creating an interactive e-learning platform, components like adaptable quizzes and responsive drag-and-drop interfaces are crucial. Could Shoelace be extended to include such interactive elements, maintaining its accessibility standards?

In applications like graphics rendering or scientific computations, how does the choice of precision in floating-point representation (single vs double precision) affect the accuracy and performance of logarithmic calculations, especially when relying on this approximation method? Are there benchmarks or scenarios where the difference between these representations is particularly notable?

How does the app handle the integration of newer Android file access protocols, like Storage Access Framework (SAF), especially for operations like multi-share or file path copying in Android versions 10 and above?

It doesn't, it opts out of it and tries to gain MANAGE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission which enables direct manipulation of files.

(Which I guess is why it's not available on Play Store).