On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Daniel Cheng
> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
>>> wrote:
As nextgens is worried about
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> GCC 4.3 shipped in March, including the new ECJ frontend. It has full support
> for all the new 1.5 language features. IMHO this means that there is no
> longer any reason to stick to java 1.4.
>
> Comments?
>
ECJ is quite stable.
Now,
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Florent Daigni?re
wrote:
> * Matthew Toseland [2008-05-17 19:00:13]:
>
>> On Saturday 17 May 2008 00:29, Matthew Toseland wrote:
>> > Ian and I have eventually come to the conclusion that we should include
>> db4o,
>> > and use it for our various persistence
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
>> As nextgens is worried about anonymous contributions, I thought he might want
>> to review this before I apply it.
>
> You know, I wish you guys would at least try using that
I know I repeat myself, but if you consider db4o you should also
consider perst as an option.
Toad, can you do your 'disk full test' with perst to compare it against db4o?
Perst and db4o seem to provide the same things. But according to
http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/perstbench.html
perst is much
I've got to say, I really hope Perst employ better software engineers
than their web designers, because their website is awful. It somewhat
shakes my confidence in them. I know this seems like a very
superficial judgement, but if they put little care into the public
face of their software, it is
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Daniel Cheng
wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke wrote:
>> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
>> wrote:
>>> As nextgens is worried about anonymous contributions, I thought he might
>>> want
>>> to
Hi,
while ./freenet/ compiles with 1.4, you already need 1.5 for ./contrib/bdb
(yes I know, nobody else want to recompile freenet-ext).
// Sven-Ola
Am Samstag 17 Mai 2008 22:58:02 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
> GCC 4.3 shipped in March, including the new ECJ frontend. It has full
> support for
convinced that we need a database... as our requirements
are completely different from their typical use-cases... but well, your
immediate concern is to store persistent requests to disk, right? What
about using Hibernate or javax.persistence (from EE) to do that ?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080518/d907c910/attachment.pgp>
ing all the 3rd party code we
bundle is unrealistic.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080518/9bf7ccf7/attachment.pgp>
(recent) processors.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080518/98e6b78a/attachment.pgp>
scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080518/589871c3/attachment.pgp>
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Juiceman wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
>> GCC 4.3 shipped in March, including the new ECJ frontend. It has full support
>> for all the new 1.5 language features. IMHO this means that there is no
>> longer any reason to stick
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As nextgens is worried about anonymous contributions, I thought he might want
to review this before I apply it.
You know, I wish you guys would at
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Florent Daignière
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-05-17 19:00:13]:
On Saturday 17 May 2008 00:29, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Ian and I have eventually come to the conclusion that we should include
db4o,
and use it for our
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
GCC 4.3 shipped in March, including the new ECJ frontend. It has full support
for all the new 1.5 language features. IMHO this means that there is no
longer any reason to stick to java 1.4.
Comments?
ECJ is quite
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Daniel Cheng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As nextgens is worried about anonymous contributions, I thought he might
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Daniel Cheng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As
I know I repeat myself, but if you consider db4o you should also
consider perst as an option.
Toad, can you do your 'disk full test' with perst to compare it against db4o?
Perst and db4o seem to provide the same things. But according to
http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/perstbench.html
perst is much
I've got to say, I really hope Perst employ better software engineers
than their web designers, because their website is awful. It somewhat
shakes my confidence in them. I know this seems like a very
superficial judgement, but if they put little care into the public
face of their software, it is
20 matches
Mail list logo