[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: infixorder -- more hints for Oriana, and a slightly OT but interesti
Re: infixorder -- more hints for Oriana, and a slightly OT but interesting consideration
Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:41:36 -0600
Thunderbird 18.104.22.168 (X11/20070103)
Ok, I think I've helped you. Now in return I'd like you to listen,
while I tell you a little story.
--snip all content--
Best wishes for your life,
Hear hear! I love a good impassioned speech, and particularly when it
is advocating the Right Thing.
You aren't by any chance doing programming for Pisa's physics
department, are you? Because I've had occasion to work with some of
Pisa's physics code, one project in particular (I'll give you details
privately if you ask, no need to spread more gossip than necessary), and
it was really quite full of kruft and kludge. The assumption was that
it was probably written that way so it would be faster (as is the case
with a lot of nasty looking code), but it turns out that it is way too
slow. Just wondering if that was your project (although I think not...
no SOAP, HTTP, etc involved here... just FORTRAN77 style programming
(psuedo common blocks) in C++) or if you knew anything about it.
Sorry if this post is slightly incoherent, I'm very sleepy now, and I
just finished a proof for abstract algebra that really had me by the
throat for a while.