Yes, it comes across the same way in English! You got your point across. We don't document functions that are not available in GMP because when they implement the same functions (which they have now done) they invariably choose a different name (which they did), which means we have to change the name of our function to match. Not much point documenting it then is there!
If you had asked about this, you might have found there was a good reason for it! You seem overly eager to find some fault.... Bill. 2010/1/11 Gianrico Fini <[email protected]>: > Hi cheater, > >> Some of the program benchmarks that we have in our full benchmark >> suite tell a completely different story, putting MPIR well ahead for >> those sorts of things. They show that in an overall program, we do >> quite well. > > Those programs are FAKE! Unfortunately for you I'm able to read some > lines of code. > This bench_two program _is_a_silly_fake_!!!! > > I wrote in another thread, because I wanted to have an explicit > subject. > Try to remove the cheating programs, then tell me again if "you do > quite well" in an "overall program". > > And do not expect any other help from me, you cheater! > > I'll go and sleep the sleep of the just (I hope it means the same > thing as in my mother-language)... what about you? > > Gian. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "mpir-devel" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en. > > > >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
