Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.unix.programmer > #16914
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.unix.programmer |
| Subject | Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily |
| Date | 2025-01-08 14:41 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <vlm2qi$fqs$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <677e2eb8$0$375$426a34cc@news.free.fr> <vllql7$sn6$2@reader2.panix.com> <677e8523$0$28061$426a34cc@news.free.fr> |
In article <677e8523$0$28061$426a34cc@news.free.fr>, Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> wrote: >Dan Cross, dans le message <vllql7$sn6$2@reader2.panix.com>, a écrit : >> I think it's important to define what you mean when you write, >> "thread condition." What, exactly, is that? Perhaps you mean >> a condition variable? > >Yes, of course that is what “thread condition” means in the context of a >discussion about POSIX threads. Not really. A condition variable is a synchronization primitive; it is not inherently an attribute of a thread. When one phrases it as "thread condition" one gives the impression that one is talking about some aspect of the thread itself, such as its state, or the "condition" that it is in, in a similar way that one might talk about the condition of a patient in a doctor's office. As always, in computing, it's better to be precise. >> If so, that's true, but I fail to see >> the relevance: people write multithreaded code that does IO in >> multiple all the time; there are some techniques that are common >> for this (Scott alluded to the so-called "pipe trick", due to >> Bernstein) and some that are less common. > >Yes: there are some techniques that are common to implement I/O concurrency >and that work in the context of threads. You are arguing my point for me: >the threads did not make implementing the I/O concurrency simpler; quite the >opposite it they made them harder, as proven by the fact that “techniques” >had to be deployed. That's a silly argument. "Techniques" had to be developed for literally all of this stuff. Moreover, things like the self pipe trick are independent of threads. That's a "technique" for avoiding races between signal delivery and "select" etc. That it can be usefully employed in a threaded context doesn't say much either for or against threads. >POSIX threads do not make I/O concurrency easier, they are not made for >that, they are for performance. This is a specious statement that is not backed up by evidence and is trivially false (two threads can execute blocking "write" calls on two file descriptors concurrently). The assertion that POSIX threads are for "performance" deserves some citation. POSIX threads might enable one to write parallel code, thus facilitating higher performance than single-threaded code, or they might not, depending on the implementation and the host computer (e.g., if executed on a uniprocessor machine). Fundamentally, threads are about having multiple control flows that execute concurrently in a single address space. That's it, really. - Dan C.
Back to comp.unix.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Sebastian <sebastian@here.com.invalid> - 2024-11-11 07:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-11 10:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-11 08:28 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-11 16:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 20:55 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:31 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 15:05 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 15:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:47 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 21:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:23 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:50 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-12 20:29 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-19 18:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 04:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 08:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 11:51 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 11:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:54 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 10:03 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:56 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 16:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:58 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:50 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 15:07 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 13:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:52 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:35 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:17 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:26 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 22:49 -0500
[OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 05:26 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 00:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 06:09 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 09:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 20:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 13:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:59 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:26 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:51 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages mas@a4.home - 2024-11-21 15:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-21 16:08 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-11-21 17:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 14:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 21:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 22:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:10 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:16 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 22:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 23:44 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 14:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 10:22 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 13:59 +0000
Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 14:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 16:14 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 15:07 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:44 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 00:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 21:22 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 19:48 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 20:30 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 21:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:50 +0000
Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 10:33 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 10:38 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:45 +0100
Re: Why TF? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-29 23:01 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-30 09:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 13:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 14:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-29 16:41 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2024-12-29 17:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 18:59 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-29 22:19 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-30 18:10 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 23:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 03:40 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-02 16:29 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 19:36 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 02:55 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-03 18:15 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 10:12 +0000
OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 08:31 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 11:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-04 22:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 19:17 -0300
Re: OT: Windows Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-09 22:27 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-05 16:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-05 17:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-05 21:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 14:08 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 14:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 15:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-01-06 12:42 -0500
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 18:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-06 18:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 18:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:18 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 14:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 15:35 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:10 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-07 17:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2025-01-06 17:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:28 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-06 20:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 00:49 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-07 02:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 08:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 14:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 03:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 07:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 14:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 14:41 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 15:54 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:17 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-07 16:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:37 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 15:22 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 16:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 16:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:11 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:02 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 16:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 13:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 16:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-01-08 09:55 -0800
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 18:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-16 15:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-08 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-15 22:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:43 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 14:51 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 15:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-16 17:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-16 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 16:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 15:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:31 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 19:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-09 04:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:02 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:27 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:03 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 02:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:40 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:00 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 23:32 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-12-28 19:02 -0600
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-28 21:12 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:54 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 07:39 -0500
A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 14:32 +0000
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:03 +0100
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:49 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:55 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:07 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-28 14:26 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:10 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:11 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:11 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 07:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-12-27 17:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:15 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-12-27 19:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 11:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:33 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-21 19:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-22 10:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-23 11:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:17 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:20 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 05:46 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 12:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 21:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-21 22:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:47 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:53 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-23 18:17 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 12:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-21 05:38 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:01 +0000
csiph-web