I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
Ï've seen this snippet of code (or extremely minor permutations of it)
appear a number of places, under various lisence
On 11/06/2010, Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
Ï've seen this snippet of code (or extremely
On 11/06/2010, at 4:27 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
Ï've seen this snippet of code (or extremely minor permutations
On 11/06/2010, Brett Porter br...@apache.org wrote:
On 11/06/2010, at 4:27 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
Ï've seen this snippet of code (or extremely minor
fr., 11.06.2010 kl. 06.35 -0700, skrev Jason van Zyl:
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like to include somewhere in our code base. It's like 30 lines of
code or so.
On 11/06/2010, Kristian Rosenvold kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com wrote:
fr., 11.06.2010 kl. 06.35 -0700, skrev Jason van Zyl:
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
I have a memoizer
(http://www.javaconcurrencyinpractice.com/listings/Memoizer.java) that
I'd like
imo where ever you drop the code just make it very clear where it came
from, a link to this thread might not hurt to add as well...point
being as others have said it should be perfectly fine for code @ the
ASF but these sorts of things have a way of rearing their ugly head
years down the road and
You do your coding work, I'll take care of the legal for you. The model of
everyone having to check everything is stupid. Code away, if I find a problem
we'll yank it.
On Jun 11, 2010, at 7:16 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
fr., 11.06.2010 kl. 06.35 -0700, skrev Jason van Zyl:
On Jun 10,
I am picking up some positive tweets here and there, but I'd be really
happy if those of you who test parallel building could report back with
some numbers in response to this message. I am particularly interested
in the difference between parallel and weave (and linear too), mostly to
assess that
Well, weave mode doesn't work for CXF. Ends up with a NullPointerException
down in antrun-plugin someplace. Thus, I cannot help you there.
For CXF on my i7 820QM (4 cores, 8 threads) turning off checkstyle/pmd and
having everything already code generated/compiled (so mostly just running
Interesting info, and good numbers! Weave is a double edged sword;
while it may be promising even
faster builds, by design it has this irritating tendency to run mojos
(of the same execution in different modules)
*exactly* in parallel, more or less simulating how I'd write a unit
test to test
On Friday 11 June 2010 1:40:07 pm Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
Interesting info, and good numbers! Weave is a double edged sword;
while it may be promising even
faster builds, by design it has this irritating tendency to run mojos
(of the same execution in different modules)
*exactly* in
13 matches
Mail list logo
