There are four distinct words here. When "affect" is accented on the final syllable (a-FECT), it is a verb meaning "have an influence on": "The million-dollar donation from the industrialist did not affect my vote against the Clean Air Act." A much rarer meaning is indicated when the word is accented on the first syllable (AFF-ect), meaning "emotion." In this case the word is used mostly by psychiatrists and social scientists-- people who normally know how to spell it. The real problem arises when people confuse the first spelling with the second: "effect." This too can be two different words. The more common one is a noun: "When I left the stove on, the effect was that the house filled with smoke." When you affect a situation, you have an effect on it. The less common is a verb meaning "to create": "I'm trying to effect a change in the way we purchase widgets." No wonder people are confused. Note especially that the proper expression is not "take affect" but "take effect"--become effective. Hey, nobody ever said English was logical: just memorize it and get on with your life.
The only 200 MHz Pentium was the Pentium Pro. That is a server class part. That is the processor that allowed
Walnut Creek CDROM to set all those records on an FTP server.
Of course and they make that pretty clear. But their much better memory disambiguation and anaylsis of the program allow them to apply this trick much more often than GCC can.
I think what he is remembering is that Perforce stores its file data in RCS files just like CVS. But that doesn't prevent atomic commits. Since they have a central server they can easily block other users during the commit and do a rollback if something fails.
Actually one of the bugfixes send to Linus shortly after P4 tapeout was a patch to fix the bogo-mips code so it didn't try to put the number of clocks per second in a 32-bit register.:-)
The original circuit for 'rdtsc' used to count with the ALU's clock and would count by 2 instead of one. So we could run any faster than 1Ghz before Linux would die.
No multiple cores means less complexity. It means designing a good processor that uses 95million transisters and then using two of them, rather than a great processor that uses 200million transisters. (Or whatever the counts are up to now)
Sure the big processor will run programs faster, but it is majorly harder to design. And if you have an MP OS and enough work to keep both processors busy, then the two cores is a HUGE win. Unfortunately current benchmarks won't demonstrate that very well.
The single processor still have all the same synchronization problems because it needs to support MP and cluster configurations.
But it is not that hard and is a major selling point.
The old curd can be handled by a simple microcode engine after the decoders and can generate correct results without a huge overhead. (If you have all the old microcoders around, interesting bunch those guys.)
Something like the P4 is majorly complicated and the complexity of supporting the real-mode and tasking stuff pales in comparison to the whole. Sure it added complexity, but don't assume that the 32-bit execution is any slower as a result of supporting that stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
No tumors are varelse and we can kill them.
Especially considering that at $50 for the OS and $50/yr for the subscription to their software archive you might as well have just purchaced XP.
And no one would think of sueing Lindows.
You are right. I am an idiot. It my mind Intel processors start with the 'Pro. I memory is very hazy before that.
The only 200 MHz Pentium was the Pentium Pro. That is a server class part. That is the processor that allowed Walnut Creek CDROM to set all those records on an FTP server.
10,000 emails a day is nothing.
I guess I am reminiscing about the good o days...
Your requirements are discriminating to fat people and are therefore not enforcable.
They just need to make a deal with Walmart and a couple other major stores to be notified if a certain range of RFID tags are seen.
Yes, and I would take your roommate's computer every time.
Interesting. Thanks for the links.
Perhaps, but I but this ramdisk would be cheaper.
Just stop looking at pretty women and you will be fine.
You have a dentist you need to sue.
Anyone else have any luck?
It is a fun game.
Besides it shows that there is a "used" copy on amazon for $12.99.
Use vsound to rip a realplayer stream. Works great.
Who said myth and moneymaker are mutually exclusive?
Of course and they make that pretty clear.
But their much better memory disambiguation and
anaylsis of the program allow them to apply this trick
much more often than GCC can.
Do you know how hard Intel has to work to make new processors virtualize a 286 well enough to run OS/2?
Is there really any commercial reason they should expend the same effort?
-Wayne
All the annoying flash and shockwave ads are gone as well. Bliss!
apt-get install adzapper
And then set your proxy. TaDa!
I think what he is remembering is that Perforce stores its file data in RCS files just like CVS. But that doesn't prevent atomic commits. Since they have a central server they can easily block other users during the commit and do a rollback if something fails.
You gave the instructions to fetch the latest version of the 2.5 tree. To test this release the right command is:
bk clone -rv2.5.40 bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.5 linux-2.5.40
That said you should only do the clone if you don't already have a bitkeeper tree somewhere. Doing local clone and a pull is MUCH faster.
-Wayne
Actually one of the bugfixes send to Linus shortly after P4 tapeout was a patch to fix the bogo-mips code so it didn't try to put the number of clocks per second in a 32-bit register. :-)
The original circuit for 'rdtsc' used to count with the ALU's clock and would count by 2 instead of one. So we could run any faster than 1Ghz before Linux would die.
No multiple cores means less complexity. It means designing a good processor that uses 95million transisters and then using two of them, rather than a great processor that uses 200million transisters. (Or whatever the counts are up to now)
Sure the big processor will run programs faster, but it is majorly harder to design. And if you have an MP OS and enough work to keep both processors busy, then the two cores is a HUGE win. Unfortunately current benchmarks won't demonstrate that very well.
The single processor still have all the same synchronization problems because it needs to support MP and cluster configurations.
But it is not that hard and is a major selling point.
The old curd can be handled by a simple microcode engine after the decoders and can generate correct results without a huge overhead. (If you have all the old microcoders around, interesting bunch those guys.)
Something like the P4 is majorly complicated and the complexity of supporting the real-mode and tasking stuff pales in comparison to the whole. Sure it added complexity, but don't assume that the 32-bit execution is any slower as a result of supporting that stuff.