3 ms·
A note -- if you're linking to arXiv, it's better to link to the abstract (http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.1459 http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.1459) rather than directly t
by Sniffnoy 12y ago
A note -- if you're linking to arXiv, it's better to link to the abstract (http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.1459 http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.1459) rather than directly to the PDF. From the abstract, one can easily click through to the PDF; not so the reverse. And the abstract allows one to do things like see different versions of the paper (this one has 34 versions!), search for other things by the same authors, etc.
- dennybritz 12y agoThank you, will do that next time :)
- thyrsus 12y agoYes. The first thing I wanted to know was whether this was a "classic" paper published a few years ago (e.g., Gul Agha's MIT AI-TR 844) or whether it was current. That question is instantly answered in the abstract. Instead, I went to look at the references to see when they were published, where I caught this amusing line: AMD AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual October 12, 3011 From the future! :-)