The most upvoted question/answer on stackoverflow is this one:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11227809/why-is-processing-a-sorted-array-faster-than-processing-an-unsorted-array/11227902#11227902
I wanted to see if the results could be reproduced in Pharo, and indeed
they can (though I only ge
Hi Thomas,
Can you share more about the definition of your CallMethod function in C?
From the uFFI point of view the binding looks ok…
How are you opening Pharo? From the command line or the pharo launcher?
Are you on cygwin/mingw? One other possibility (since you’re playing with C
libraries) i
Hi, thanks for your quick reply. I found the culprint while writing this
email :-)
Generally, what I'm trying to do is to make a very basic package to
create and communicate with COM components on Windows, mostly as an
exercise :-) I found this library: http://disphelper.sourceforge.net/ as
a
> El 11 sept 2019, a las 11:07, Tomaž Turk escribió:
>
> Hi, thanks for your quick reply.
no problem ;)
> I found the culprint while writing this email :-)
Cool!
>
> Generally, what I'm trying to do is to make a very basic package to create
> and communicate with COM components on Windows
> Well, the pointer survives, the area of memory pointed by that
pointer will be recycled with subsequent calls in general.
I'll pay special attention to that, but it's probably a matter of
properly creating and releasing COM objects.
I have another question - in FFI call, how would one sen
On 11. 9. 2019 3:23, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
It is good that you have a coherent idea of how << can work.
After the changes sent by Sven, Pharo 8 seems to have the exactly same
idea. IMNSHO.
The question I was addressing is how << *DOES* work in Pharo.
Having simple things working, if they a
> El 11 sept 2019, a las 11:43, Tomaž Turk escribió:
>
> > Well, the pointer survives, the area of memory pointed by that pointer
> > will be recycled with subsequent calls in general.
>
> I'll pay special attention to that, but it's probably a matter of properly
> creating and releasing CO
Excellent, thanks!
On 11. 9. 2019 11:46, Herby Vojčík wrote:
On 11. 9. 2019 3:23, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
#write: really does not seem to be any improvement over #nextPutAll:.
Will post.
Actually, I won't. I don't care any more.
I found Contributor Covenant-derived Code of Conduct was added to Pharo,
three mo
On 11/09/19 9:14 a. m., Herby Vojčík wrote:
> On 11. 9. 2019 11:46, Herby Vojčík wrote:
>> On 11. 9. 2019 3:23, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
>>> #write: really does not seem to be any improvement over #nextPutAll:.
>>
>> Will post.
>
> Actually, I won't. I don't care any more.
>
> I found Contributor C
> On Sep 11, 2019, at 8:17 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> wrote:
>
> On 11/09/19 9:14 a. m., Herby Vojčík wrote:
>> I found Contributor Covenant-derived Code of Conduct was added to
>> Pharo, three months ago. This is unacceptable under any circumstances.
>>
>> Have fun in your woke hell
> On 11 Sep 2019, at 19:07, James Foster wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 11, 2019, at 8:17 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/09/19 9:14 a. m., Herby Vojčík wrote:
>>> I found Contributor Covenant-derived Code of Conduct was added to
>>> Pharo, three months ago. This is unaccepta
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
> https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/1/4/code-of-conduct - which
> is quite popular and generally accepted.
Based on the reaction earlier in the thread, I was expecting something
highly opinionated and polarizing, but it seems to boil down to: be
professiona
I see no problem with having *a* code of conduct, but there are some worrying
aspects of *this* code. Clearly there is a need for generality in any code,
but the vagueness of the drafting seems to me to open it up to all sorts of
mischief. Consider the paragraph:" *Project maintainers have the righ
Thanks for sharing that, Peter. It's an important point.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 2:02 PM Peter Kenny wrote:
> I see no problem with having *a* code of conduct, but there are some
> worrying aspects of *this* code. Clearly there is a need for generality in
> any code, but the vagueness of the dra
First, apologies for the shambles of formatting this post.
Secondly, having re-read it, I think it was inappropriate to mention Sven in
the way I did. I still maintain that there are problems with the code, but I
wish to retract the comments about Sven, and I apologise for including them.
16 matches
Mail list logo
