Thanks.
-Tom
On Feb 8, 2013, at 7:13 PM, Michael Haberler wrote:
>
> Am 09.02.2013 um 00:36 schrieb Matt Shaver:
>
>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:48:49 -0500
>> Tom Easterday wrote:
>>
>>> Michael,
>>> I recall seeing a message from you a while back saying you had given
>>> up on raspberry pi (I'm
Am 09.02.2013 um 00:36 schrieb Matt Shaver:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:48:49 -0500
> Tom Easterday wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>> I recall seeing a message from you a while back saying you had given
>> up on raspberry pi (I'm paraphrasing) but I can't seem to locate that
>> in my mail at the moment. I wa
On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:48:49 -0500
Tom Easterday wrote:
> Michael,
> I recall seeing a message from you a while back saying you had given
> up on raspberry pi (I'm paraphrasing) but I can't seem to locate that
> in my mail at the moment. I was curious why it was you abandoned it?
> Was it an I/O i
Nice work. I was thinking about trying to set up something like this
with 9P. I know that people have been discussing ZeroMQ, but I am still
interested in investigating the 9P connection. If/when I get back to my
thesis research I need to do some timing tests and structural
differences betwe
after yesterday's discussion, I decided to do a basic benchmark how scalable
the method is - to answer the question "is this going to be a bottleneck - yes
or no".
This is back-of-envelope, worst case analysis, without _any_ attempt at
optimisation. (such as could be: using faster protobuf enc
On Friday 08 February 2013 03:59:00 andy pugh did opine:
Message additions Copyright Friday 08 February 2013 by Gene Heskett
> On 8 February 2013 05:54, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?BasicSteps
> >
> > That is the put up or shut up page I presume.
>
> Not exac
