Anonymous user
Talk:Text processing/Max licenses in use: Difference between revisions
Talk:Text processing/Max licenses in use (view source)
Revision as of 09:28, 14 March 2012
, 12 years agoadded comments about times (should be through and inclusive). ~~~~
(added comments about times (should be through and inclusive). ~~~~) |
|||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 9:
The [http://rosettacode.org/mlijobs.txt link to mlijobs.txt] returns a 404 --[[User:Daonlyfreez|Daonlyfreez]] 12:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
:Not sure about the RC copy, but I still have the original [http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dxbvd2v_4fg4pr8dg here].
: Whoops! Must have mised that in the MediaWiki upgrade. I'll get it fixed this evening; I still have all the old files. --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 12:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
:: Alright; It (and several other files) may now be found at http://rosettacode.org/resources/ --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 02:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
== Name change needed ==
This new name is really awful. It tells you so little about the task, and is '''boring'''. Please revert the change, Max licenses in use is much better. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 15:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, it's unexciting and it isn't as informative as it might be. But it does give one a much better idea of what the task is about than "Max licenses in use". That's why I consider it an improvement. If you can think of an further improvement, I welcome you to '''[[wp:Wikipedia:Be bold|be bold]]''' and move the page again. —[[User:Underscore|Underscore]] ([[User talk:Underscore|Talk]]) 21:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I agree that a serial-numbered name is bad. However, the old name has a problem; when I first saw it I assumed it was a task about ''implementing license restrictions'', i.e. tracking the number of copies of your program running on a network. So maybe something like Text processing/Max licenses in use. —[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 16:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
==times THROUGH times==
I noticed that most programmers did not treat the time as steady-state, but discontinous with the times being descreet only at job INs and OUTs, that is, the times --between-- INs and OUTs also exist, but are never listed, nor are the times shown as THROUGH (start) to (end). The maximum is not just AT two times, but all times in between (inclusive) those times listed.
<br><br>
If one looks at the actual input file, you'll see job 1837 logging at OUT starting at 08:40:40, but the next job doesn come IN until 08_40_47 (records 3577 and 3578). [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 09:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
| |||