hi to all,
i'm a new plan9 user, i just wanted to know how to use my usb in plan9.
because i have a pdf file about plan9 and i would like to read it in plan9
anybody? please help.
thanks in advance,
ru60hzatgmaildotcom
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 04:54:59PM -0400, Patrick Kelly wrote:
> >"long" is guaranteed to be at least 32 bits by C89. So this could do,
> >but could be a little overkill:
>
> >1) If a compiler set on a 32 bits machine, "long" to be 64 bits? (I
> >haven't looked at the sources, but I guess it is no
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:11:07PM +0100, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> on 64-bit machines, int and long are 32 bits,
> long long (vlong) is 64 bits, just as on 32-bit machines,
> but pointers are 64 bits. defines uintptr
> as the integer type that will hold a pointer.
> u8int, u16int, u32int and u64i
"long" is guaranteed to be at least 32 bits by C89. So this could do,
but could be a little overkill:
1) If a compiler set on a 32 bits machine, "long" to be 64 bits? (I
haven't looked at the sources, but I guess it is not the case for
ken-cc
suite).
2) On a 64 bits (since Charles Forsyth
on 64-bit machines, int and long are 32 bits,
long long (vlong) is 64 bits, just as on 32-bit machines,
but pointers are 64 bits. defines uintptr
as the integer type that will hold a pointer.
u8int, u16int, u32int and u64int are used in device drivers
and elsewhere to declare values (eg, in memor
vlong
2010/3/30 EBo :
>
>> with kenc, long === 32 bits even on 64 bit machines; there is no
>> difference in storage size between long and int.
>
> out of curiosity, does kenc implement long long's?
>
>
>
> with kenc, long === 32 bits even on 64 bit machines; there is no
> difference in storage size between long and int.
out of curiosity, does kenc implement long long's?
> 1) If a compiler set on a 32 bits machine, "long" to be 64 bits? (I
> haven't looked at the sources, but I guess it is not the case for ken-cc
> suite).
>
> 2) On a 64 bits (since Charles Forsyth has done work for amd64 at least
> on ken-cc, this exists), I imagine "long" is an octa (64 bits).
Still for TeX and al., the computation is done with tetras (32 bits),
and one of the variable thing to set is the C name for this tetra
(the identifier "integer" is used and is defined afterwards in the C
code).
"long" is guaranteed to be at least 32 bits by C89. So this could do,
but could be
On Mar 30, 2010, at 14:23, Jack Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly
wrote:
Read up on why Plan 9 was written. We've been succeeding for 20
years so
far.
I think this is an interesting comment in light of the evolution
thread. Most people (incorrectly) equate e
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Jack Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly wrote:
> around with relatively few upgrades for the past 420 billion years or
s/billion/million/
-Jack
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly wrote:
> Read up on why Plan 9 was written. We've been succeeding for 20 years so
> far.
I think this is an interesting comment in light of the evolution
thread. Most people (incorrectly) equate evolution with progress.
Whether or not other more pop
I am utterly depressed that this pedestrian crap can so easily get a
rise out of several 9fans after all these times.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:07:11AM -0700, Albert Skye wrote:
> > order is unnatural
>
> The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution
> by Stuart A. Kauffman
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Order-Self-Organization-Selection-Evolution/dp/0195079515
order is unnatural for th
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Albert Skye wrote:
> > order is unnatural
>
> The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution
> by Stuart A. Kauffman
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Order-Self-Organization-Selection-Evolution/dp/0195079515
>
>
Why have facts when speculat
> order is unnatural
The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution
by Stuart A. Kauffman
http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Order-Self-Organization-Selection-Evolution/dp/0195079515
On one side, you have code (result) and consistency; on the
other side, you have _inhumanity_ since you have increasing of the
entropy that is disorder: order is unnatural, and is the mark of human
activity. "Open source" seems very natural in this sense: the
bazaar...
Until you factor in one
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 01:34:12PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
> > This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will "only" have one-man projects. . .
>
> True, if anyone feels that a project is too big for them then
> by all means put a shout out on the list and see if anyone there wants to
> help.
Everyt
> This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will "only" have one-man projects. . .
True, if anyone feels that a project is too big for them then
by all means put a shout out on the list and see if anyone there wants to help.
I only make the point (which has been made so many times before on this list)
On Mar 30, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Gabriel Diaz Lopez de la Llave wrote:
hello
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will "only" have one-man
projects. . .
Do it yourself refers to the community doing anything they need. Most
things are so trivial that one or two people can do it. That doesn't
Ok, but please, put the limit in two man per project, three at most.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:40 PM, hugo rivera wrote:
> I don't agree. I think that more than one person can be involved in
> any given project.
>
>
> 2010/3/30 Gabriel Diaz Lopez de la Llave :
>> hello
>>
>> This way (dot-it-yo
I don't agree. I think that more than one person can be involved in
any given project.
2010/3/30 Gabriel Diaz Lopez de la Llave :
> hello
>
> This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will "only" have one-man projects. . .
>
> slds.
>
> gabi
>
--
Hugo
hello
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will "only" have one-man projects. . .
slds.
gabi
El 30/03/2010, a las 12:19, hugo rivera escribió:
> I agree with Steve.
> I like the community approach to this matter: if plan9 doesn't have
> what you need, do it yourself; if you do something that mig
I agree with Steve.
I like the community approach to this matter: if plan9 doesn't have
what you need, do it yourself; if you do something that might be
useful for others share it and see what happens.
Being a newbie myself I find very hard to write my own utilities, but
that's a good way to learn
> No one's willing to spearhead a "General Purpose 9" experiment, and no
> one's interested in collaborating on and contributing to such a project?
>
> "If you want [general purpose], you know where to get it." seems to
> be the period that ends all such discussion.
I wouldn't quite agree, the d
25 matches
Mail list logo
