You can read a 4 page PDF:
tug.org/TUGboat/tb31-2/tb98knut.pdf
first thing I would check is the date. I think it might be April 1.
On Dec 18, 12:43 pm, Robert McIntyre wrote:
> That's brilliant. Has anyone considered targeting clojure for
> LaTeX3? Numerical support for one would be simplif
That's brilliant. Has anyone considered targeting clojure for
LaTeX3?Numerical support for one would be simplified, since LaTeX3
just uses actual rational numbers as its default instead longs or ints
or whatever.
This could be big, guys!
--Robert McIntyre
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:19 PM,
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Daniel Werner
wrote:
> On 18 December 2010 16:29, Ken Wesson wrote:
>> "Once Java 7 is out" is starting to seem like "once LaTeX3 is out" or
>
> Oh, you haven't heard the news yet? LaTeX3 has already been superseded anyway:
>
> http://river-valley.tv/tug-2010/an-
On 18 December 2010 16:29, Ken Wesson wrote:
> "Once Java 7 is out" is starting to seem like "once LaTeX3 is out" or
Oh, you haven't heard the news yet? LaTeX3 has already been superseded anyway:
http://river-valley.tv/tug-2010/an-earthshaking-announcement
--
You received this message because
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Daniel Werner
wrote:
> I seem to recall that Rich was interested in pursuing this avenue
> again once Java 7 was out, but I could be wrong.
"Once Java 7 is out" is starting to seem like "once LaTeX3 is out" or
"once Half-Life 2 Episode 3 is out" or "once Duke Nuke
On 18 December 2010 10:41, nicolas.o...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Thank you very much for the explanations. I will go for Fork/join.
> Anybody is working on a clojure wrapper?
Take a look at Clojure's par branch:
https://github.com/clojure/clojure/tree/par
It has proof-of-concept Fork/Join support, bu
Thank you very much for the explanations. I will go for Fork/join.
Anybody is working on a clojure wrapper?
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Konrad Hinsen
wrote:
> On 17 Dec 2010, at 19:47, nicolas.o...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>> How about futures? They are in clojure.core and can be used for much th
On 17 Dec 2010, at 19:47, nicolas.o...@gmail.com wrote:
How about futures? They are in clojure.core and can be used for
much the same purposes as Fork/Join, unless your individual tasks
are so small that the performance advantage of Fork/Join makes a
difference.
Thank you for this sugge
(future ...) enqueues tasks onto a thread pool.
On Dec 17, 10:47 am, "nicolas.o...@gmail.com"
wrote:
> > How about futures? They are in clojure.core and can be used for much the
> > same purposes as Fork/Join, unless your individual tasks are so small that
> > the performance advantage of Fork/
> How about futures? They are in clojure.core and can be used for much the same
> purposes as Fork/Join, unless your individual tasks are so small that the
> performance advantage of Fork/Join makes a difference.
>
Thank you for this suggestion. I thought a bit, and I wonder whether
it can resul
On 17 Dec, 2010, at 15:31 , nicolas.o...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have a complex dependency graph between the used agents, so it is
> difficult to compute the p-agent I want.
> (They are actually launched by watchers on the agents itself.)
>
> After thought, agents may not be what I need. I may try
I have a complex dependency graph between the used agents, so it is
difficult to compute the p-agent I want.
(They are actually launched by watchers on the agents itself.)
After thought, agents may not be what I need. I may try to use
Fork/Join instead...
(What I do is a bit more structured on th
2010/12/17 nicolas.o...@gmail.com
> I could, but I would have to add a watcher on every agent putting them
> into a seq hold by an atom.
> Which does not seem right, in some way...
>
Is the thread which creates the agent calls the thread which will wait for
the agents being up to date at the end
I could, but I would have to add a watcher on every agent putting them
into a seq hold by an atom.
Which does not seem right, in some way...
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> 2010/12/17 nicolas.o...@gmail.com
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>
>> Is there a way to wait for all agents t
2010/12/17 nicolas.o...@gmail.com
> Dear all,
>
>
> Is there a way to wait for all agents to be up-to-date without using await
> ?
>
> I am in a specific case with a lot of agents and I want all of them to
> have finished their work,
> and only a few of them had initially work to do.
> It is qu
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:54 AM, tetraourogallus
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to call an agent inside a dosync and wait on a Java semaphore
> for its completion.
> [I tried clojure's await but that gave nasty exceptions]
> Can anyone explain, why wait-for-agent works as I expected while the
> code
16 matches
Mail list logo
