Or, if the team does allow refactoring as part of an unrelated PR, have clean commits that allow me to review what you did in logical steps.
If that’s not how you worked on the change than you either rewrite the history to make it look like you did or you’ll have to start over.
CUDA was there first and has established itself as the standard for GPGPU (“general purpose GPU” aka calculating non-graphics stuff on a graphics card). There are many software packages out there that only support CUDA, especially in the lucrative high-performance computing market.
Most software vendors have no intention of supporting more than one API since CUDA works and the market isn’t competitive enough for someone to need to distinguish themselves though better API support.
Thus Nvidia have a lock on a market that regularly needs to buy expensive high-margin hardware and they don’t want to share. So they made up a rule that nobody else is allowed to write out use something that makes CUDA software work with non-Nvidia GPUs.
That’s anticompetitive but it remains to be seen if it’s anticompetitive enough for the EU to step in.
To be honest, the first incarnation of Spaces was really damn good; they deserved some credit for that. Then they made it worse so it matches iOS.
DX1 runs fine with an alternative renderer (the Community Update should have everything you need to get going).
I could run Invisible War with few issues as well – but then I realized it’s Invisible War and played something else instead.
I use interactive rebases to clean up the history of messy branches so they can be reviewed commit by commit, with each commit representing one logical unit or type of change.
Mind you, getting those wrong is a quick way to making commits disappear into nothingness. Still useful if you’re careful. (Or you can just create a second temporary branch you can fall back onto of you need up your first once.)