search for: imperit

...Boolean expression, too. > * If a piece of td codes is complicated enough that we need an if-else > to eliminate its duplication, I think it is worthy of the duplication. Perhaps. I'm sort of on the fence on this. I don't like the !if stuff I introduced for readability reasons. An imperitive-style if might make things easier but I think I could live with the duplication. > [Why NO abstractions (like `define foo(a, b, c)`)?] > * Abstractions is probably worthy of, but I am not sure yet. I think > we could wait until it is clear that we really need abstractions. I'm not...

...nctional. But this means that speed of allocation is essential- purely functional languages have been measured to allocate an average of 1 word every 6 instructions. Generally they allocate larger blocks (often 10-20 words at a shot) less often, but we're still talking about an insane (to imperitive programming language standards) allocation rate. What I'd like is something similiar to the Ocaml garbage collector, but with a unique young heap for each thread (so I don't have to acquire a lock to allocate). But this requires me to have two words of thread-local storage for every...

.... >> * If a piece of td codes is complicated enough that we need an if-else >> to eliminate its duplication, I think it is worthy of the duplication. > > Perhaps. I'm sort of on the fence on this. I don't like the !if stuff > I introduced for readability reasons. An imperitive-style if might make > things easier but I think I could live with the duplication. > >> [Why NO abstractions (like `define foo(a, b, c)`)?] >> * Abstractions is probably worthy of, but I am not sure yet. I think >> we could wait until it is clear that we really need abst...

...o. >> * If a piece of td codes is complicated enough that we need an if-else >> to eliminate its duplication, I think it is worthy of the duplication. > > Perhaps.  I'm sort of on the fence on this.  I don't like the !if stuff > I introduced for readability reasons.  An imperitive-style if might make > things easier but I think I could live with the duplication. > >> [Why NO abstractions (like `define foo(a, b, c)`)?] >> * Abstractions is probably worthy of, but I am not sure yet. I think >> we could wait until it is clear that we really need abstr...

...;m not sure that caused the problem). I uninstalled the new version and and installed a prior version with no change. Below is a look at my config, a debug cut and paste and the current version I am running. This is a production server with a loss of revenue generation for the company and is imperitive that I get resolved asap. Any help would be appreciated! * Proftpd Conf:* # # This is the ProFTPD configuration file # $Id: proftpd.conf,v 1.1 2004/02/26 17:54:30 thias Exp $ ServerName "ProFTPD server" ServerIdent on "FTP Server ready.&...

My purpose is to eliminate copy-paste style of programming in td files as much as possible, but only to a point that the new language constructs do not create too much overhead/readability-downgrade. In other words, I am targeting those low-hanging fruit of copy-paste programmings in td files that are eliminated by a simple for-loop syntax. The repetitive patterns I observed in PTX backend (and

I'm trying to decide on a linux distro to use for our enterprise Samba server. I like that there is a deb repo for Debian from samba.org, but I'm more comfortable with CentOS (Redhat). I just want to be sure I have a well supported Samba server and I need at least the 3.0.20 version so I can use the "inherit owner" property. I also want automatic updates for bugfixes and

On Oct 6, 2011, at 12:42 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > Jakob Stoklund Olesen <jolesen at apple.com> writes: > >> On Oct 6, 2011, at 7:59 AM, David A. Greene wrote: >> >>> For example, I want to be able to do this: >>> >>> defm MOVH : >>> vs1x_fps_binary_vv_node_rmonly< >>> 0x16, "movh", undef, 0, >>>