[ODE] On the meaning of ODE stability (was some quick notes on 0; 6) ...

Terry L. Triplett c0d3g33k at gmail.com
Thu Jun 22 16:06:44 MST 2006

We weren't really arguing, IMHO - it was a discussion as befits an OSS
community where policy isn't dictated from above (by Mr. Gates, Mr. Ballmer,
Ms. Fiorina, Mr. McNealy, Mr. Bush (ahem -sorry - Mr. Cheney), etc.).

My own specific nudges and requests regarding consistent sonames, shared
libraries and such seem prone to be interpreted in light of old arguments
that bear only partial relevance to the particular issue that I'm facing.
Oh well.  :-)

On 6/22/06, Rodrigo Hernandez <kwizatz at aeongames.com> wrote:
> I forgot what we were arguing about, I see your point, I would probably
> never need a C# interface, and thus I wasnt aware that was what you were
> looking after (sorry, you may have pointed that out before), I also see
> why you think ode.single and ode.double would be better than sufixes
> (makes for nicer looking assemblies), but I still think a unified
> library would be better in the long run (Think SSE implemented into
> different functions rather than clumsy #ifdef's).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://q12.org/pipermail/ode/attachments/20060622/1728b997/attachment.htm

More information about the ODE mailing list