>Do you agree that support for boolean fields in gpre is a good thing?
If somebody provides the support, then I am unlikely to complain, strangely
enough
I do know a few users who continue to use gpre.
Regards
Paul
--
I care about it. It was my first C program. But that doesn't mean I ever
want to use it again.
On Wednesday, March 2, 2016, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 03.03.2016 00:21, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> >
> > Do you agree that support for boolean fields in gpre is a good thing?
>
> Yes, I do. I know al
03.03.2016 00:21, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
>
> Do you agree that support for boolean fields in gpre is a good thing?
Yes, I do. I know almost nobody cares about GPRE nowadays as it's not
widely used. But if we can maintain and extend it, why not doing that. I
just hope your patch will not touch
Hello, All.
Do you agree that support for boolean fields in gpre is a good thing?
--
WBR, SD.
--
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App inst
