As noted earlier I am preparing a contribution of Bloom Filter classes to
the collections module. As part of this submission there are several
methods that operate on BitSets that are used as part of Bloom Filter
manipulation and analysis. My question is, should these be contributed as
Bloom Fil
On 10/7/19 8:37 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:27 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/5/19 12:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary Gregory
wrote:
Hi Phil and all:
It l
Greetings,
I am preparing a pull request to bring Bloom Filters in the the
collections package. The pull requests is at
https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/pull/83 and the Jira ticket
is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS-728
The package has a builder that create Proto
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:27 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>
> On 10/5/19 12:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> > On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary Gregory
> >>> wrote:
> Hi Phil and all:
>
>
On 07/10/2019 15:00, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
Hi.
Le lun. 7 oct. 2019 à 15:54, Alex Herbert a écrit :
I have found a bug in the stress test application that affects all the
BigCrush results.
This was found when updating the stress test application to support
64-bit testing within PractRand, a
Hi.
Le lun. 7 oct. 2019 à 15:54, Alex Herbert a écrit :
>
> I have found a bug in the stress test application that affects all the
> BigCrush results.
>
> This was found when updating the stress test application to support
> 64-bit testing within PractRand, and testing of upper and lower 32-bits
I have found a bug in the stress test application that affects all the
BigCrush results.
This was found when updating the stress test application to support
64-bit testing within PractRand, and testing of upper and lower 32-bits
from 64-bit out. An initial attempt to show that the lower 32-bit
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 08:40, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 05/10/2019 18:59, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 1:19 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
> >>>
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary
On 05/10/2019 18:59, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 1:19 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10/5/19 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:17 AM sebb wrote:
>>>
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 02:32, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
> Hi Phil and all:
>
> It looks li
