Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Stark
Тема Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)
Дата
Msg-id CAM-w4HMg7-cYR3nJyMLCV49y_CW13qJOwg_DnHt8dhTTmySvVQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)  (Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [Removing all the other xposted lists -- don't do that!]
>
> Okay, sorry.  I thought since the reply was pg-specific it would cut down noise.

I'm sorry I was unclear. I meant, I was removing all the others from
my reply and was saying not to cross-post like that in the first
place. I see you removed them in your response too which is good but I
missed that and responded to the previous message.

-- 
greg



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Browder
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Static code checker research worth investigating (Communications of the ACM, 03/2016, Vol. 59, No. 03, p. 99)
Следующее
От: Kevin Grittner
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: The plan for FDW-based sharding