* Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09 2015, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>
> > It's hard not to agree with the overall "let's make it more robust if it
> > can be done sanely+cheaply+cleanly". I was a bit skeptical about whether
> > those three requirements could be met, since we'd have to do
* Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09 2015, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>
> > It's hard not to agree with the overall "let's make it more robust if it
> > can be done sanely+cheaply+cleanly". I was a bit skeptical about whether
> > those
On Fri, Oct 09 2015, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> It's hard not to agree with the overall "let's make it more robust if it
> can be done sanely+cheaply+cleanly". I was a bit skeptical about whether
> those three requirements could be met, since we'd have to do
> byte-by-byte traversal of the
On Fri, Oct 09 2015, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> It's hard not to agree with the overall "let's make it more robust if it
> can be done sanely+cheaply+cleanly". I was a bit skeptical about whether
> those three requirements could be met, since we'd have to do
>
4 matches
Mail list logo