|
You realise I have access to the logs, right?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Does he not realise that the name Chris Maunder is the unspeakable name of the god of CP?
|
|
|
|
|
the Insider link "C# Hidden Optimizations" doesn't work for me. 404.
|
|
|
|
|
It 404's for Google as well. Looks like some time between midnight and now that page was removed.
The CodeProject effect?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you should start caching the pages you publish links to? As Google does.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: The CodeProject effect?
That site got Maundered.
|
|
|
|
|
It worked around 6:30am EST.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Having read it, I suspect he removed it because the hidden optimizations were very old hat. I was going to comment on his blog to correct him on some of his terminology but he'd disabled comments.
|
|
|
|
|
It's been optimized out.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly ----- "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997 ----- "The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Or just hidden, as the title said.
|
|
|
|
|
The blogger in question changed the name of the post, breaking our link. I've updated the news item with the new link, so go check it out if you missed this the first time around.
As noted already, he's turned off comments, too.
Enjoy
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. Got it.
|
|
|
|
|
Apropos Chris's message in the Lounge about swearwords in the title, I think this message[^] title should also be adjusted.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Every message has a "vote to remove message" link at the bottom right.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but the content of the message itself was quite acceptable and relevant to the forum.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
My humblest apologies, Richard. I certainly did not intend to offend anyone. Just a voice of frustration with the issue at hand. I agree with you that I was precariously balanced on the fence with this one, but before I slip and fall, I'll change it.
|
|
|
|
|
Apology not necessary, I know how frustrating IT can be, and you obviously understand why I raised the point.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
I think'Bloody' is acceptable, it is a very mild expletive, no worse than Damn or Bugger.
Hardly worthy of a complaint of this nature, but it may be a cultural thing, here in Britain it is fine.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I was actually thinking of sticking with bollocks.
|
|
|
|
|
My point was less about the word itself than Chris taking exception to a message of yours in the lounge that contained an asteriskised(I apologise for this) expletive.
[edit]Apropos of another of your recent posts, would you want your newborn to be reading such messages?[/edit]
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
I did apologise for that, but it was frustration at watching a bunch of useless tossers give a woeful performance.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: a bunch of useless tossers give a woeful performance.
What did you expect?
Anyway, everyone has apologised (and I apologise for starting this thread) and I really don't believe it's important enough to worry about any more; let's move on.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry I made you feel like you needed to apologize as well...
|
|
|
|
|
PogoboyMtK wrote: I'm sorry I made you feel like you needed to apologize as well
And I'm sorry that you feel sorry ...
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
This could go on for a while, couldn't it?
|
|
|
|