similar to: Do not buy "Asterisk for Small Office Setup"!

Don't buy this book for its content. It's a waste of $40. However, it is useful to wave in front of my customer's faces to show them that Asterisk is real. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20040724/5ccf4012/attachment.htm

Hi, Thanks for bringing this up. I am reluctant to update to recommonmark >= 0.4.0, because it is not available in any Ubuntu version, Debian Testing or even Debian Unstable. While we could do something custom on the buildbot, I think it would be a disservice for our users to use a library that is not packaged in modern operating systems yet. Dmitri

Hello David Chisnall, John McCall, David Blaikie and other people who may concern > If your teachers are really making this sort of superficial generalization, > they're doing you a disservice. This hit my head. Actually I didn't test the performance of those two, the iteration and the recursion, at all. And in this field of study, testing is very much important, I believe. And

On 09/05/2017 06:01 PM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote: > FHDATA wrote: > >> some users' login fails since they type upper >> case for their user ids ,etc ... > Wouldn't it be better to explain to the users that the userid is case > sensitive? You probably don't want a system where Fhdata, FHData and > FHDATA are all possible and are different users. >

Someone made mention on IRC earlier of a reference to rpmforge on the wiki and it got me thinking (yeah, never a good thing)... A quick search on the wiki itself shows a lot_of references to rpmforge. As this is a dead project and has been a dead project for 3+ years now it would be quite useful to the consumers of the wiki material for those references to be removed and replaced with something

On 3 Oct 2012, at 09:48, John McCall wrote: > If your teachers are really making this sort of superficial generalization, > they're doing you a disservice. I completely agree with John here - we had a case a few years ago where someone spent ages refactoring their algorithm to be iterative and was surprised that it became slower (with the MS compiler). Looking at the assembly, it was

On 08/11/14 01:03 PM, Das, Dibyendu wrote: > I didn’t see SPIR discussed anywhere. This isn't OpenCL and depending on OpenCL for OpenMP may not really make sense. While I have my own opinions - If you feel strongly that it will help enable higher performance somewhere please list those reasons. ---------- More specifically LLVM has a native AMD dGPU backend that is tightly coupled to the

On Oct 3, 2012, at 12:22 AM, Journeyer J. Joh wrote: > Hi David Blaikie and others who might be interested on this > > Thank you very much! > > #1. Then I'd like to know, to make Clang/LLVM optimize a recursion > into an iteration, how a recursion has to be implemented with any > compiler option? (if the language is C/C++) Simple recursive algorithms are likely to be

All, Arnaud and I were discussing the *.spec files we have in the NUT source tree, and with the 2.4.0 release of NUT just around the corner, I would like to make sure we are pointing people in the right direction for NUT RPMs. Currently, we have *.spec files for "generic-rpm" (has a few macros for RedHat 6.x and 7.x), Mandriva (circa NUT 2.0.2), openSUSE, and RedHat (apparently from

R-Listers. The following is a rant originally sent privately to Frank Harrell in response to remarks he made on this list. The ideas are not new or original, but he suggested I share it with the list, as he felt that it might be of wider interest, nonetheless. I have real doubts about this, and I apologize in advance to those who agree that I should have kept my remarks private. In view of this,

One thing I want to call out: On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > I suppose what I'm saying is that we are currently not using *any* C++'11 > features. It seems like conservatively great progress for LLVM 3.4 to bump > the minimum GCC requirement up to enable use of VC 2010-era features (like > rvalue refs and simple stdlib

Alternate title: How can I persuade my students that R is for them? Alternate title: Can R replace SAS, SPSS or Stata for clinicians? I am teaching introductory statistics to twelve physicians and two veterinarians who have enrolled in a Mentored Clinical Research Training Program. My course is the first in a sequence of three. We (the instructors of this sequence) chose to teach R rather than

> whilst at the same time the development has ceased. I've found some > severe issues with OggFLAC that essentially make it a useless format > for streaming, no one cared. Yes, this is sad. cdparanoia, which could be considered a strong opensource meatspace partner to FLAC (along with cdda2wav) is also effectively dead. All three living on only in the ports trees of various operating

> On Aug 10, 2018, at 13:28, Marshall Clow via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 9:20 PM, Eric Fiselier via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Hi All, > > I recently committed <filesystem> to trunk. I wanted to bring attention to some quirks it currently has.

FWIW, I’d like for us to come to an agreement before the branch for LLVM 7.0 is cut. How do others feel about this? Am I wrong when I claim that shipping an ABI-unstable feature in the std:: namespace is a deviation from normal practice? Am I overcautious when I say it’s asking for trouble? Eric, I know you’re busy and may not have time to do the work so I’m totally willing to chime in, but I’d

On Oct 28, 2013, at 2:19 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > One thing I want to call out: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > I suppose what I'm saying is that we are currently not using *any* C++'11 features. It seems like conservatively great progress for LLVM 3.4 to bump the minimum GCC

On 11/22/2013 9:25 PM, Mikael Lyngvig wrote: > Hi guys, > > I have begun writing on a new document, named "Mapping High-Level > Constructs to LLVM IR", in which I hope to eventually explain how to > map pretty much every contemporary high-level imperative and/or OOP > language construct to LLVM IR. > > I write it for two reasons: > > 1. I need to know

how to upgrade CentOS 6.6 from 6.2?Thanks, Jegadeesh On Monday, 16 February 2015 6:37 PM, Carson Chittom <carson at wistly.net> wrote: Jegadeesh Kumar <jegasmile at yahoo.com> writes: > I wan to know the details steps about how to do OS upgrade? > Say for an example currently i am using CentOS 6.2 and plan to upgrade > that to 7. Please detail me the steps. I

Hi, My current understanding of the problem (based on https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774) is that we have a type, file_time_type, which is part of the ABI and is currently defined as std::chrono::time_point<_FileSystemClock>, where _FileSystemClock is an internal type represented using a __int128_t. However, C++20 will add a type called file_clock and redefine file_time_type to be

Hello! If I have more than a hundred analog telephones (analog lines) that need to be connected to Asterisk PBX, what kind of hardware do I need, and where can I buy it? Thanks in advance!