On 2016-05-10 19:50, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 02:32:19PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>
>>> Also in the paper it is at least suggested (Fig. 1) that the matrix
>>> dimensions are 32-bit floating point, while the code uses 32-bit
>>> integers (which makes sense).
>>
>>
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 02:32:19PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> > Also in the paper it is at least suggested (Fig. 1) that the matrix
> > dimensions are 32-bit floating point, while the code uses 32-bit
> > integers (which makes sense).
>
> while it might make sense, i'm pretty sure that t
On 2016-05-10 12:03, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>
> obviously this situtation has led to some confusion, as there now are
> two UUIDs, one of them being documented in a published paper, and the
> other being promoted by a reference implementation.
>
> i would therefore like to persuade all partie
On Tue, 10 May 2016 12:03:46 +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> hi,
>
> [i just (re)subscribed to this list after i unsubscribed about 15
> years years ago...
Welcome back!
> surely i missed something (it's a pity that the list archives aren't
> searchable, btw)]
Here's an archive with search:
hi,
[i just (re)subscribed to this list after i unsubscribed about 15 years
years ago...surely i missed something (it's a pity that the list
archives aren't searchable, btw)]
i'm writing as the lead (and sole) developer of the libambix library [1]
that was designed as a reference implementation
