On 2010-06-26, Jean-Francois wrote:
> Le jeudi 24 juin 2010 00:56:09, Daniel Melameth a icrit :
>> While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
>> following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
>> never used REBOL):
>>
>> "This was an int
Le jeudi 24 juin 2010 00:56:09, Daniel Melameth a icrit :
> While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
> following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
> never used REBOL):
>
> "This was an interesting build, because it exposed a unique
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 08:47:09PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:56:09PM -0600, Daniel Melameth wrote:
> > While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
> > following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
> > never
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:56:09PM -0600, Daniel Melameth wrote:
> While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
> following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
> never used REBOL):
>
> "This was an interesting build, because it exposed a
2010/6/23 Daniel Melameth
> While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
> following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
> never used REBOL):
>
> "This was an interesting build, because it exposed a unique bug due to the
> more secure m
While most of us already know how the subject rings true, I still found the
following from REBOL's CTO's public blog post interesting nonetheless (I've
never used REBOL):
"This was an interesting build, because it exposed a unique bug due to the
more secure methods of memory allocation on OpenBSD.
6 matches
Mail list logo