atsider

4 ms·

1.
by atsider 4y ago
Yep, to me it's not far superior to find-replace: https://nullprogram.com/blog/2017/09/07/
2.
by atsider 5y ago
I think there is nothing to prove, I set up my prosody just by reading the documentation -- eventually https://compliance.conversations.im/ is a great tool to see how well you are doing, and which modules are worth uncomme
3.
by atsider 6y ago
wrt to old crusty FORTRAN code: scipy is using many of those popular libraries, it is based on them. wrt to type signatures, many of those ancient FORTRAN libraries are written with implicit interfaces, so bugs are likely to show up. I cam
4.
by atsider 6y ago
Yep, it combines the convenience of a GUI, the scripting capabilities and the power of the key shortcuts. It's almost perfect!
5.
by atsider 6y ago
I'm using Debian's 78.5.0. It uses external gpg by default and works flawlessly for me with my hardware USB token.
6.
by atsider 6y ago
This us a great addon I discovered recently, but nevertheless they have an introductory video about the Blender editor: https://github.com/GDQuest/blender-power-sequencer/blob/1.5....
7.
by atsider 6y ago
And yet none of those technologies is fortran-specific, nor mentioned on its standard, nor solve at tiny bit the problems the OP was specifying.
8.
by atsider 6y ago
But then we are not talking about fortran anymore: I tried recently PGI and it is far behind than intel/gfortran with respect to the standard. I can code with CUDA in many more languages than fortran. If I wanted to use gfortran, I ju
9.
by atsider 6y ago
Exactly, that is my point: so we are mainly still in the land of Fortran95, which is not designed for taking advantage of the latest features of the hardware.
10.
by atsider 6y ago
Nowadays intel is not a reference for C++; the versions found on HPC compilers are not the fastest nor the best following the latest standards. I don't think commercial/open source is the key here: on the fortran side we have been