Computer Science and Programming
Відкрити в Telegram
Channel specialized for advanced topics of: * Artificial intelligence, * Machine Learning, * Deep Learning, * Computer Vision, * Data Science * Python Admin: @otchebuch Memes: @memes_programming Ads: @Source_Ads, https://telega.io/c/computer_science
Показати більше
Сітка:📈 Аналітичний огляд Telegram-каналу Computer Science and Programming
Канал Computer Science and Programming (@computer_science_and_programming) у мовному сегменті Англійська є активним учасником. На даний момент спільнота об'єднує 140 479 підписників, посідаючи 804 місце в категорії Технології та додатки та 88 місце у регіоні Італія.
📊 Показники аудиторії та динаміка
З моменту свого створення невідомо, проект продемонстрував стрімке зростання, зібравши аудиторію у 140 479 підписників.
За останніми даними від 31 серпня, 2026, канал демонструє стабільну активність. Хоча за останні 30 днів спостерігається зміна кількості учасників на -734, а за останні 24 години на -18, загальне охоплення залишається високим.
- Статус верифікації: Не верифікований
- Рівень залученості (ER): Середній показник залученості аудиторії становить 7.96%. Протягом перших 24 годин після публікації контент зазвичай збирає 1.94% реакцій від загальної кількості підписників.
- Охоплення публікацій: В середньому кожен допис отримує 11 177 переглядів. Протягом першої доби публікація в середньому набирає 2 728 переглядів.
- Реакції та взаємодія: Аудиторія активно підтримує контент: середня кількість реакцій на один пост – 14.
- Тематичні інтереси: Контент зосереджений навколо ключових тем, таких як sellerflash, github, developer, pricing, waybienad.
📝 Опис та контентна політика
Автор описує ресурс як майданчик для висловлення суб'єктивної думки:
“Channel specialized for advanced topics of:
* Artificial intelligence,
* Machine Learning,
* Deep Learning,
* Computer Vision,
* Data Science
* Python
Admin: @otchebuch
Memes: @memes_programming
Ads: @Source_Ads,
https://telega.io/c/computer_sc...”
Завдяки високій частоті оновлень (останні дані отримано 01 вересня, 2026), канал підтримує актуальність та високий рівень охоплення публікацій. Аналітика показує, що аудиторія активно взаємодіє з контентом, що робить його важливою точкою впливу в категорії Технології та додатки.
140 479
Підписники
-1824 години
-2617 днів
-73430 день
Архів дописів
𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗜𝘀 𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗠𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝗜𝘁 𝗜𝘀
In the recent interview with Scott Hanselman, 𝗥𝗼𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗮 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗱𝗲, 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝗢𝗳 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝘁 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄, revealed the story about the architecture of Stack Overflow. They handle more than 6000 requests per second, 2 billion page views per month, and they manage to render a page in about 12 milliseconds. If we think about it a bit, we could imagine they use some kind of 𝗺𝗶𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗿𝘂𝗻𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗹𝗼𝘂𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗞𝘂𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘁𝗲𝘀.
But the story is a bit different. Their solution is 15 years old, and it is a 𝗯𝗶𝗴 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗰 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝘂𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻-𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀. It is actually 𝗮 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗽𝗽 on IIS, which runs 200 sites. This single app is running on nine web servers and a single SQL Server (with the addition of one hot standby).
They also use 𝘁𝘄𝗼 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲, one on SQL Server with large RAM (1.5TB), where they have 30% of DB access in RAM and also they use two Redis servers (master and replica). Besides this, they have 3 tag engine servers and 3 Elastic search servers, which are used for 34 million daily searches.
All this is handled by a 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺 𝗼𝗳 𝟱𝟬 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝘀, who manage to 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝟰 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝘀 several times daily.
Their 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗸 is:
🔹 C# + ASP. NET MVC
🔹 Dapper ORM
🔹 StaeckExchange Redis
🔹 MiniProfiler
🔹 Jil JSON Deseliazier
🔹 Exceptional logger for SQL
🔹 Sigil, a .Net CIL generation helper (for when C# isn’t fast enough)
🔹 NetGain, a high-performance web socket server
🔹 Opserver, monitoring dashboard polling most systems and feeding from Orion, Bosun, or WMI.
🔹 Bosun, backend monitoring system, written in Go
𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗧𝗼 𝗘𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗣𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀?
With Pull Requests, we lost the ability to have a proper Continuous Integration (CI) process in a way that delayed integration due to code reviews. So here comes a “Ship/Show/Ask” branching strategy. The thing is that not all pull requests need code reviews.
So, whenever we make a change, we have three options:
🔹 𝗦𝗵𝗶𝗽 - Small changes that don’t need people’s review can be pushed directly to the main branch. We have some build pipelines running on the main brunch, which run tests and other checks, so it is a safety net for our changes. Some examples are: fixing a typo, increasing the minor dependency version, updated documentation.
🔹 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝘄 - Here, we want to show what has been done. When you have a branch, you open a Pull Request and merge it without a review. Yet, you still want people to be notified of the change (to review it later), but don’t expect essential discussions. Some examples are: a local refactoring, fixing a bug, added a test case.
🔹 𝗔𝘀𝗸 - Here, we make our changes and open a Pull Request while waiting for feedback. We do this because we want a proper review in case we need clarification on our approach. This is a classical way of making Pull Requests. Some examples are: Adding a new feature, major refactoring, and proof of concept.
Encryption and Decryption using Linear Algebra with C++
This project implements a text encryption and decryption system using a matrix-based encryption technique. This project serves as an educational and practical exploration of matrix-based encryption techniques, demonstrating the fundamental concepts of encryption and decryption in a user-friendly manner.
💻https://github.com/farukalpay/TextEncryptionWithLinearAlgebra
𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗱𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗹𝘆
An essential step in the software development lifecycle is code review. It enables developers to enhance code quality significantly. It resembles the authoring of a book. The author writes the story, which is then edited to ensure no mistakes like mixing up "you're" with "yours." Code review in this context refers to examining and assessing other people's code.
There are different 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗳𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗱𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄: it ensures consistency in design and implementation, optimizes code for better performance, is an opportunity to learn, and knowledge sharing and mentoring, as well as promotes team cohesion.
What should you look for in a code review? Try to look for things such as:
🔹 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 (does this integrate well with the rest of the system, and are interactions of different components make sense)
🔹 𝗗𝘂𝗻𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 (does this change is what the developer intended)
🔹 𝗗𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘆 (is this code more complex than it should be)
🔹 𝗡𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 (is naming good?)
🔹 𝗘𝗻𝗴. 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘀 (solid, kiss, dry)
🔹 𝗧𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 (are different kinds of tests used appropriately, code coverage),
🔹 𝗦𝘁𝘆𝗹𝗲 (does it follow style guidelines),
🔹 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, etc.
𝗗𝗶𝗱 𝗜 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗺𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸?
There are no two same days nor two same weeks
The "best" can mean different on "different" days
This is why we need to have weekly and monthly goals
And the results are that matters, not the effort
I wish you a great week ahead 👋
𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗪𝗲𝗯 𝗔𝗣𝗜𝘀?
There are several methods to tackle this issue, primarily involving intercepting traffic originating from a web API. If the goal is to intercept HTTP/HTTPS traffic from various sources, one approach involves manually constructing a custom sniffer. However, this method can be burdensome as it requires tailoring the solution for each API individually.
Now, Postman offers a solution to sniff traffic from any API with the HTTP/HTTP protocol. What is good about this feature is that traffic capture enables you to generate a Postman collection, which you can then use to test, evaluate, and document captured APIs.
Check more at the following link:
🔗https://blog.postman.com/introducing-postman-new-improved-system-proxy/.
Implementing RSA in Python from Scratch
🔗https://coderoasis.com/implementing-rsa-from-scratch-in-python/https://coderoasis.com/implementing-rsa-from-scratch-in-python/
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗦𝗼𝗳𝘁𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗕𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀 𝗜𝗻 𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗼𝗿𝘆
Check out this list of all books tagged with software architecture. They are ranked based on Goodreads score with applied simple algorithmic rules (relevant to software architecture, content is not obsolete, it must be tech agnostic, and average rating > 3.5). Rating is based on the number of written reviews, including the average rating, the number of ratings, and the publishing date.
💻 https://github.com/mhadidg/software-architecture-books
𝗚𝗶𝘁 𝗠𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲 𝘃𝘀 𝗥𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲
One of the most powerful Git features is branching. Yet, while working with it, we must integrate changes from one branch into another. The way how to do this can be different.
We have two ways to do it:
𝟭. 𝗠𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲
When you merge Branch A into Branch B (with 𝚐𝚒𝚝 𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚐𝚎), Git creates a new merge commit. This commit has two parents, one from each branch, symbolizing the confluence of histories. It's a non-destructive operation, preserving the exact history of your project, warts, and all. Merges are particularly useful in collaborative environments where maintaining the integrity and chronological order of changes is essential. Yet, merge commits can clutter the history, making it harder to follow specific lines of development.
𝟮. 𝗥𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲
When you rebase Branch A onto Branch B (with 𝚐𝚒𝚝 𝚛𝚎𝚋𝚊𝚜𝚎), you're essentially saying, "Let's pretend these changes from Branch A were made on top of the latest changes in Branch B." Rebase rewrites the project history by creating new commits for each commit in the original branch. This results in a much cleaner, straight-line history. Yet, it could be problematic if multiple people work on the same branch, as rebasing rewrites history, which can be challenging if others have pulled or pushed the original branch.
So, when to use them:
🔹 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘁𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆, especially on shared branches or for collaborative work. It's ideal for feature branches to merge into a main or develop branch.
🔹 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀 or when you want a clean, linear history for easier tracking of changes. Remember to rebase locally and avoid pushing rebased branches to shared repositories. Also, be aware 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆. If your branch is shared with others, rebasing can rewrite history in a way that is disruptive and confusing to your collaborators.
