On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 03:55:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm not really sure why you're bringing the UWIN GCC thing up on this
> mailing list
Amen. Could we just kill it here, please?
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, an
John van V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [someone else]
>> Also, note that if we use a modified version of the GPL, it will likely
>> be incompatible with the real GPL, which will cause big licensing
>> problems.
> In a compomise, everybody gives a little, otherwise everybody suffers;
The dual
John van V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am going to play the peace-maker here for a moment, is there any
> possibility of negoiating a way out of this because I dont feel that it:
> a) benefits the world of users
> and
> b) makes a whole lotta sense considering that ATT has attempted to go
>
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>At 04:01 PM 1/6/01 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>>On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:59:04AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> > >Which is exactly what Chip did in his safe-signals patch. 33% slowdown.
>> > I think you misremember that number. IIRC it was somewhere betw
Quoted from http://www.perl.com/pub/2000/09/ilya.html,
an interview with Dr. Ilya Zakharevich:
>
> Q: Could you describe in more detail what additional text-
> handling primitives you would like to see included with Perl?
> What string munging operations are absent that really ought to
> be inclu
At 07:19 PM 1/10/01 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> "NI" == Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > NI> Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> Apropos safe signals, isn't it possible to let perl6 handle avoiding
> >
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "NI" == Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> NI> Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> Apropos safe signals, isn't it possible to let perl6 handle avoiding
> >> zombie processes internally? What use does having to do wait(
This whole issue is reminding of Randal's defense.
The jury was far too mystified to decide in his favor, only the judge understood the
arguement, hence no jail time ( for a 3 time felon ?? )
I think this thread started as a result of a desire to use GNU code in Perl6 where the
license would
"John van V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>From the MinGW.Sourceforge.net list--
>
>I am going to play the peace-maker here for a moment, is
>there any possibility of negoiating a way out of this
>because I dont feel that it:
Doubtful. The first thing you must understand is that the
FSF
>From the MinGW.Sourceforge.net list--
I am going to play the peace-maker here for a moment, is there any possibility of
negoiating a way out of this because I dont feel that it:
a) benefits the world of users
and
b) makes a whole lotta sense considering that ATT has attempted to go the
Alan Burlison wrote:
> Hmm. I've been half-following the async IO and signals thread in
> perl6-internals. The first thing I would say is that if you think there
> are portability problems with threads and signals, wait until you get to
> play with cross-platform AIO. General received wisdom s
11 matches
Mail list logo
