WaveFunctionCollapse VS ASP.NET Core

Thank you! And yes, I agree. I was looking at uh https://github.com/mxgmn/WaveFunctionCollapse and wondering if that were applicable here :)

Have a good day!

Intuitively, it measures the difference between two probability distributions. It's not symmetric, so it's not quite that, but in my opinion, it's good intuition.

As motivation, say you're an internet provider, providing internet service to a business. You naturally want to save money, so you perhaps want to compress packets before they go over the wire. Let's say the business you're providing service to also compresses their data, but they've made a mistake and do it inefficiently.

Let's say the business has, incorrectly, determined the probability distribution for their data to be $q(x)$. That is, they assign probability of seeing symbol $x$ to be $q(x)$. Let's say you've determined the "true" distribution to be $p(x)$. The entropy, or number of bits, they expect to transmit per packet/symbol will be $-\sum p(x) lg(q(x))$. Meaning, they'll compress their stream under the assumption that the distribution is $q(x)$ but the actually probability of seeing a packet, $x$, is $p(x)$, which is why the term $p(x) lg(q(x))$ shows up.

The number of bits you're transmitting is just $-\sum p(x) lg(p(x))$. Now we ask, how many bits, per packet, is the savings of your method over the businesses? This is $-\sum p(x) lg(q(x)/p(x))$, which is exactly the Kullback-Leibler divergence (maybe up to a sign difference).

In other words, given a "guess" at a distribution and the "true" distribution, how bad is it between them? This is the Kullback-Leibler distribution and why it shows up (I believe) in machine learning and fitness functions.

As a more concrete example, I just ran across a paper talking [0] about using WFC [1] to asses how well it, and other algorithms, do when trying to create generative "super mario brothers" like levels. Take a 2x2 or 3x3 grid, make a library of tiles, use that to generate a random level, then use the K-L divergence to determine how well your generative algorithm has done compared to the observed distribution from an example image.

[0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.05077.pdf

[1] https://github.com/mxgmn/WaveFunctionCollapse

Reminds me of wave function collapse - a programmatic way to generate mazes.

I am using WFC to generate the terrain, with pretty much a copy-paste implementation of the original WFC implemented into Unity.

If you still want to go the WFC route, the original WFC repository is a great place to start. There's also a (relatively barebones looking) Godot plugin you could take a look at.

wave function collapse studies - this is done with the https://github.com/mxgmn/WaveFunctionCollapse algorithm after I saw https://github.com/CodingTrain/Wave-Function-Collapse mention it. done in P5! IG https://www.instagram.com/ronivonu/

There’s an interesting approach similar to this called [Wave Function Collapse](https://github.com/mxgmn/WaveFunctionCollapse) (no relation to wfc in physics idea besides inspiration). It can infer the probabilistic constraints from one input example, and it seems to generalize quite well. Here’s a [little demo](https://oskarstalberg.com/game/wave/wave.html)

> Just .GetAwaiter().GetResult() it.

That won’t work with various synchronization contexts, where doing this would cause a deadlock. There’s not much fun in trying to debug such issues.

And now that various libraries only provide async api, or worse an non-async version wrapping the async one with . GetAwaiter().GetResult(), you’ll be in for a treat updating your dependencies.

Async all the way is the answer, although various frameworks still don’t offer async hooks. Recently I ran into this for example trying to write an async validator in blazor, but that’s not possible and you have to work around it [1].

C# 5 introduced async/await almost 12 years ago. And we’re still not “async all the way”.

[1]: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/40244

This approach to organizing middleware enhances code readability, maintainability, and reusability. By following this encapsulation pattern, you're adhering to best practices in ASP.NET Core development, ensuring your application remains well-organized and scalable.

🌟.NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET 9 Preview 2 Discussion ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 Release Notes ➡️EF Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET Aspire preview 4 - .NET Aspire

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/50643

Even if you look at Microsoft’s by far most popular GitHub project, they’re still only half as big as SupaBase. If you believe “the SupaBase story”, SupaBase grew and became twice as large as Microsoft in 3 years. Below is their likes over time if you’re curious, together with a couple of additional “too good to be true” Silicon Valley projects.

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/10117

To achieve these objectives, we will take inspiration from ASP.NET Core Identity's PasswordHasher class. It incorporates a concept of hash versioning, allowing only the number of iterations to be modified.

yes I watched several courses, may be aim not getting clearly. but i worked with asp.net which uses http call and firebase cloud function also which uses socket connection, for socket connection its makes sense to use observable bcoz there streams of data we can observe once the connection establish ,but for http it need to be call every time.