Hi.
[Preamble: In the following, I do not ask for opinions about the
design of Commons Math; I report an example of a dysfunctional
"community".]
A few days ago, rather than "shut down for holidays", I took upon me to
respond to the request of a newcomer to the CM discussions (MATH-1300).
I'm ce
hi all,
Le 29/12/2015 18:32, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>
>
>> On Dec 29, 2015, at 8:41 AM, Gilles
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:33:24 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: The
> significant refac
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 8:41 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:33:24 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
included in the
On 12/29/2015 05:10 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 10:33:15 +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Le 29/12/2015 09:21, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
>>> On 12/29/2015 04:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Stei
On 12/29/15 2:33 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Le 29/12/2015 09:21, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
>> On 12/29/2015 04:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> The significant refactoring to eliminate the
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 10:33:15 +0100, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Hi all,
Le 29/12/2015 09:21, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
On 12/29/2015 04:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
The significant refactoring to eliminate the (s
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:33:24 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
included in these changes has the possibility of introducing subtle
bugs or performa
Hi all,
Le 29/12/2015 09:21, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
> On 12/29/2015 04:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
included in these changes
On 12/29/2015 04:33 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
>>> included in these changes has the possibility of introducing subtle
>>> bugs or perform
On 12/28/15 8:08 PM, Gilles wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
>> included in these changes has the possibility of introducing subtle
>> bugs or performance issues. Please run some tests to verify tha
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:08:56 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
The significant refactoring to eliminate the (standard) next(int)
included in these changes has the possibility of introducing subtle
bugs or performance issues. Please run some tests to verify that
the same sequences are generated by the 3_
11 matches
Mail list logo
