On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:03 AM, David Nolen wrote:
> From the Qi mailing list:
> http://groups.google.com/group/qilang/browse_thread/thread/e4a2f534fad5032a
> "I contend that this kind of problem cannot be solved (efficiently) in any
> pure functional programming language. You may disagree"
> :D
On 1 January 2011 13:53, Mark Engelberg wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:03 AM, David Nolen wrote:
>> From the Qi mailing list:
>> http://groups.google.com/group/qilang/browse_thread/thread/e4a2f534fad5032a
>> "I contend that this kind of problem cannot be solved (efficiently) in any
>> pure fu
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Michael Wood wrote:
> I'm not sure how best to test that they are unique wrt. isomorphism.
(=
(* 8 (count squares-seq))
(count (distinct (flatten (map generate-isomorphs squares-seq),
of course. :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Hey,
I am trying Gloss for reading NBT [1] files.
First thing I did like is that it seems to make things real easy.
First thing I did not like is the weak separation between types
like :byte and extra data like :foo.
I think I'm nearly done with the NBT reader [2], but I ran into a
problem. What
According to my tests your squares both satisfy the conditions and are
isomorphically unique.
- Matjaz
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:03 AM, David Nolen
> wrote:
> > From the Qi mailing list:
> >
> http://groups.google.com/group/qilang/browse_
Thanks everyone! I'll go post my findings to the Qilang google group.
I'll try to moderate the smugness I'm feeling right now :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that
The header->body function in (header ...) must return a codec, so you
need to call compile-frame on the vector you're generating. Since you
don't want to call compile-frame every time you decode a frame, you
can memoize the function. A version that does both can be found at
https://gist.github.co
Hi all,
I'd apreciate help on figuring out why a loop gets number boxing
warnings, when it shouldn't:
http://clojure.pastebin.com/9uLZqGhy
I'm using clojure from:
commit f30995c86056959abca53d0ca35dcb9cfa73e6e6
Author: Stuart Halloway
Date: Fri Dec 17 15:17:20 2010 -0500
Thanks.
Albert
--
the `(binding [*compile-files* true] ...)` trick does not seem to work
for me. Still looking for something that does.
What do you mean by "the bytecode is no longer accessible" ? Wouldn't
it have to be in there somewhere in order to use the definition?
thank you,
--Robert McIntyre
On Thu, Dec
Hello Everybody,
can I force the JIT to be called immediately for certain pieces of code
after it starts executing with out waiting for the JVM realize it is
necessary? I would not mind jitting the whole code .. Actually I don't
mind waiting a few extra seconds at the start since actual run-ti
On Jan 1, 8:29 pm, Sunil S Nandihalli
wrote:
> Hello Everybody,
> can I force the JIT to be called immediately for certain pieces of code
> after it starts executing with out waiting for the JVM realize it is
> necessary? I would not mind jitting the whole code .. Actually I don't
> mind wait
>
>
> Even if the JVM put the code through the compiler right away, the
> resulting code wouldn't be very good because it will have not had time
> to profile code to apply the more powerful optimizations. It would be
> throwing all of that code away once it has had time to profile the
> code, so an
12 matches
Mail list logo
