On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Simon Marlow wrote:
Tue Jan 16 16:11:00 GMT 2007 Simon Marlow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Remove special lambda unicode character, it didn't work anyway
Since lambda is a lower-case letter, it's debatable whether we want to
steal it to mean lambda in Haskell source.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2011, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
It also seems to make finding buggy patches rather hard.
Have a look at `git bisect`.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7,
DECREASING 4 OR 5,
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Claus Reinke wrote:
In my understanding, the unorderedness of patch history in darcs is
there to make distributed repos easier (fewer constraints: same set of
patches, but not same order; can mix local commits and pulls from
various repos, no need for a central repo),
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Claus Reinke wrote:
What happens after the merges? Does one maintain the branches
somehow, or does one lose the (in-)dependency information?
Remember that a branch in git is just a name for a point in the revision
graph. When you commit to a branch the name is updated to
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Peter Davis wrote:
On 2005-03-16 02:52:39 -0800, Nicolas Oury [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
instance Splittable Integer where
split n = (2*n,2*n+1)
I haven't played much with the Splittable class yet, but what would be wrong
with
instance Splittable Integer where
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, skaller wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 19:03 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
BTW, you shouldn't generate identifiers with leading underscores
because they are reserved for the implementation.
I AM the implementation :)
You are not the C implementation.
Generated
The following paper seems relevant to this thread. Although it's written
in the context of C and C++, it's relevant to any language that combines
pre-emptive threads and imperative features.
http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.pdf
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Robert Dockins wrote:
What exactly are the semantics of C programs and why do we believe that
C compilers are correct?
With regards to threading, the semantics are undefined and the compilers
are subtly broken :-)
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dotat.at/
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
New worker threads are spawned on as needed. You'll need as many of
them as you have simultaneously-blocked foreign calls. If you have 2000
simultaneously-blocked foreign calls, you'll need 2000 OS threads to
support them, which probably won't
Simon Marlow writes:
We also like to get as clean a cpp as possible - if you go through gcc -E
you get a whole bunch of symbols defined,
The -undef option gets rid of most of those.
and cpp gets passed the -lang-c flag (whatever that means, but it
looks pretty scary).
The other
10 matches
Mail list logo
