search for: auspice

...ongly disagree. Are you aware that github is a commercial company, github inc. [1] ? What about gitlab? or Microsoft's codeplex? There are other services similar to github, why github? What happens if github goes out of business? R-project should be maintained in the academic network and under auspices of universities. [*] GitHub, Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub

...> company, github inc. [1] ? >> What about gitlab? or Microsoft's codeplex? There are other services >> similar to github, why github? >> What happens if github goes out of business? >> >> R-project should be maintained in the academic network and under >> auspices of universities. >> >> >> [*] GitHub, Inc. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...ces. Later it should show another uglier "n", then three screens where you can use the mouse to select things. However, with the llvm-gcc version I just see a dark screen. And here it hangs and eat's CPU time. I must admit that I was too lazy to simply run the program under gdb's auspice and interrupt/backtrace it :-/ Used gcc-4.2 darkplace engine ----------------------------- To get a working engine from SVN, I keep the makefile/makefile.inc in it's (almost) original form and just make sure that CC=gcc-4.2 CPUOPTIMIZATIONS=-march=athlon Now I also compile with "m...

.... [1] ? >>> What about gitlab? or Microsoft's codeplex? There are other services >>> similar to github, why github? >>> What happens if github goes out of business? >>> >>> R-project should be maintained in the academic network and under >>> auspices of universities. >>> >>> >>> [*] GitHub, Inc. >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub >>> >> >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project....

...s the listener? - case in point "Spinner" is "Interactive" and a different licensing scheme - then you have many Shoutcaster/Live365 and Icecast/Ogg stations that have varying ways to automate their requests - and policies to maintain DMCA compliance - So do they fall under the auspices of "Interactive" ? Well they have not to my knowledge to this point? And precedent has been set at least since 1999 that the Recording/licensing entities have indeed excepted it and licensed broadcasters with "request" functions/features under a "Compulsorary" license...

On 25/12/2017 7:00 AM, I?aki ?car wrote: > 2017-12-25 12:30 GMT+01:00 Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>: >> The one negative aspect of Winston's effort is caused by this weakness. If >> you tell me that something happened in revision 73909, I know it was recent. >> If you tell me that something appeared in commit 2e80059, it wastes my time >> looking

Apologies for cross-postings. ====================================== First announcement and call for papers ====================================== The 23rd European Meeting of Statisticians will be held at Funchal, capital of the Portuguese island of Madeira, from 13-18 August 2001, under the auspices of the European Regional Committee of the Bernoulli Society. For more information see the conference web site http://www.fc.ul.pt/cea/ems2001 Keynote speakers are Peter Donnelly (Oxford) on `Some statistical challenges in modern genetics', Frank den Hollander (Eindhoven) on `Polymer cha...

Am Mittwoch, den 19.03.2008, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Holger Schurig: > > Just my two cents. From time to time I'm testing LLVM via > > compiling & running such big beasts as Qt and Mozilla. Also, > > at 2.0 time I tried to compile & test bunch of software from > > KDE and many others. > > I tried to compile the 3D game engine "darkplaces" with

...hough they might exhibit the same behaviour, but maybe the answer for locality optimisation would be for the linker technology to evolve so that multiple copies of the same definition (sic) could be made; perhaps even at the Basic Block level [Block Level Linking]. But this too would lie under the auspices of the "as if" rule and respect the ODR. There is something I am missing in this that is not making me at all comfortable about the use of this attribute for namespaces (apart from the reopening issues raised by others), and in particular the application to parts of a class but not the...

So, I hear, in a couple weeks'' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down. What does that mean for this mailing list? Should we all be moving over to something at illumos or something? I''m going to encourage somebody in an official capacity at opensolaris to respond... I''m going to discourage unofficial responses, like, illumos enthusiasts etc simply trying to get people

On Sep 19, 2012, at 10:14 AM, dag at cray.com wrote: > "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn at sfconservancy.org> writes: >> I'm sorry for the intrusion of a project policy discussion onto the >> developer list, but there may be many here who may have thoughts, input, >> or question regarding Conservancy's offer for LLVM's membership, >> discussed below.

Hi R users, I request members of the R community to consider filling a short survey regarding the use of R. The survey can be found at http://goo.gl/jw1ig Please accept my apologies for posting here for a non-technical reason. The data collected will be suitably analyzed and I'll post a link to the results in the coming weeks. Thank you all for your interest and for sharing your R usage

...ibit the same > behaviour, but maybe the answer for locality optimisation would be for the > linker technology to evolve so that multiple copies of the same definition > (sic) could be made; perhaps even at the Basic Block level [Block Level > Linking]. But this too would lie under the auspices of the "as if" rule > and respect the ODR. > > > > There is something I am missing in this that is not making me at all > comfortable about the use of this attribute for namespaces (apart from the > reopening issues raised by others), and in particular the applicatio...

...- case in point "Spinner" is "Interactive" and a different licensing > scheme - then you have many Shoutcaster/Live365 and Icecast/Ogg stations > that have varying ways to automate their requests - and policies to maintain > DMCA compliance - So do they fall under the auspices of "Interactive" ? Well > they have not to my knowledge to this point? And precedent has been set at > least since 1999 that the Recording/licensing entities have indeed excepted > it and licensed broadcasters with "request" functions/features under a > "Compul...

"Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn at sfconservancy.org> writes: > I'm sorry for the intrusion of a project policy discussion onto the > developer list, but there may be many here who may have thoughts, input, > or question regarding Conservancy's offer for LLVM's membership, > discussed below. If you're not interested in that topic, please feel > free to

...ybe the answer for locality optimisation would be for the >>>> linker technology to evolve so that multiple copies of the same definition >>>> (sic) could be made; perhaps even at the Basic Block level [Block Level >>>> Linking]. But this too would lie under the auspices of the "as if" rule and >>>> respect the ODR. >>>> >>>> There is something I am missing in this that is not making me at all >>>> comfortable about the use of this attribute for namespaces (apart from the >>>> reopening issues...

Oh, I almost forgot... If you're going under compulsory licensing: 1) Listener requests cannot be honored, otherwise you will end up labeled an "interactive service" along with Audiogalaxy Rhapsody & the like. Which means more & more expensive royalties. 2) You cannot play more than 3 songs of the same album in any 3 hour period (no more than 2 in a row). Nor can you

I did manage to dv-tape this from the front row, and thus got pretty fair audio, but a slightly awkward camera angle. NYU Media Lab had a tripod set up at the back, and were apparently intending to webcast the results via real. They were a little taken aback when I mentioned Richard's aversion to propietary formats, and thanked me profusely for pointing it out, and saving them grief.

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Chris > Lattner via llvm-dev > Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 2:58 PM > To: sstewartgallus00 at mylangara.bc.ca > Cc: LLVM Developers > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] [RFC] __attribute__((internal_linkage)) > > Hi Stewart, > > I saw this get brought up at

...c users 0 Dec 19 16:45 filethree.txt ? rwxr-r-- 1 ddmc users 0 Dec 19 16:45 filetwo.txt Ooooh - this doesn't look good! I can understand 'filethree.txt' being converted to lower case; after all it is not an 8.3 filename, so it should fall under the auspices of the 'preserve case = no' option. But what about the other three? They are all good little 8.3 filenames. Why was case NOT preserved? Apparently, 'short preserve case' is dependent on 'preserve case'. That is to say, in order for 'short preserve case = yes'...