On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 14:59, Federico Lucifredi wrote:
> can anyone remind me how that pretty-printing module that El Damian
> showcased the other year was called?
>
> It was able to handle plurals ("x file/s deleted"), even irregular
> ones, among the many things ;-)
On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 13:59 -0400, Ricker, William wrote:
> LIMITS -- As near as Google can tell, the limit on 32bit is 2GB for
> filesystem (signed numbers! Fie!), 4GB for process memory (unsigned,
> yeah!).
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en==Perl+32-bit+2-GB+OR+4-GB+x86
On x86 hardware the
Hey Guys and Gals,
can anyone remind me how that pretty-printing module that El Damian
showcased the other year was called?
It was able to handle plurals ("x file/s deleted"), even irregular
ones, among the many things ;-)
I am not sure if it was the same module, but it certainly was the same
Hey Guys and Gals,
can anyone remind me how that pretty-printing module that El Damian
showcased the other year was called?
It was able to handle plurals ("x file/s deleted"), even irregular
ones, among the many things ;-)
I am not sure if it was the same module, but it certainly was the same
At work, the 64bit Power4/Power5 IBM AIX systems come with 32-bit Perl.
After reading the README, I wasn't interested in building everything in
64-bit, so when I build a Perl to build DBI with, I build it with
similar settings to the vendor's (unsupported, "contributed") 32-bit
Perl. If one of my
Double check where the limit is. It may well be 2 GB.
Ben
On 6/21/06, James Eshelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Sherm. It looks like there might be some benefit for high-end users
> who are likely to go beyond 4GB VM but we can postpone it 'til then.
>
>
> - Original Message -
Thanks Sherm. It looks like there might be some benefit for high-end users
who are likely to go beyond 4GB VM but we can postpone it 'til then.
- Original Message -
From: "Sherm Pendley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "James Eshelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006
On Jun 21, 2006, at 10:23 AM, James Eshelman wrote:
> I have a large O-O perl system running on Fedora Core 3 ( I know,
> it's old! - that's a separate subject) on Xenon 64-bit
> processors. The perl interpreter is only a 32-bit app. Anyone
> have an idea how much performance boost we're
I have a large O-O perl system running on Fedora Core 3 ( I know, it's old! -
that's a separate subject) on Xenon 64-bit processors. The perl interpreter
is only a 32-bit app. Anyone have an idea how much performance boost we're
likely to get by recompiling everything for 64-bits? Looks
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 07:44:45PM -0400, Kripa Sundar wrote:
> CPAN shows two modules called C::Scan and C::Sharp. But both seem
> untouched since 2001. Are there other choices out there for me?
So you discount them on the grounds that they might be stable and
bug-free?
--
David Cantrell |
10 matches
Mail list logo
