[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Russ Allbery) wrote on 22.01.02 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A case that (in a slightly different context) recently came up on
alt.usage.german (I don't remember if this particular point was made,
but it belongs):
berliner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) wrote on 25.04.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If you have the double-indirect, the window of vulnerability is smaller,
but it's still there if you're running multithreaded.
Looks zero-sized to me. One memory write, let the garbage collector
collect the old
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) wrote on 12.04.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(No, I don't know why unaligned access to 8-bit data is faster, but there
you go)
How *do* you unalign 8-bit data?!
MfG Kai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) wrote on 11.04.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
*) All private routines have #defines to give them a _Perl_ prefix
*) All private data have #defines to give them a _PL_ prefix
IIRC, ISO C says you cannot have /^_[A-Z_][A-Za-z_0-9]*$/. That's reserved
for the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jarkko Hietaniemi) wrote on 15.12.00 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 12:13:01PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
IMHO, the first thing we need to design and code is the API and runtime
library, since everything else builds on top of that, and we can design
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jarkko Hietaniemi) wrote on 13.08.00 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Aug 13, 2000 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
Why do all those acts have to be performed to do an open?
I must not be explaining myself very well... To do an open() from
Perl the user does
