App-DocKnot

 view release on metacpan or  search on metacpan

t/data/generate/c-tap-harness/docknot.yaml  view on Meta::CPAN

  for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting out-of-tree builds
  to build some test programs, ship others, and run them all regardless of
  what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier for test cases to find
  their supporting files when they run.

  Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
  utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report results.
  The C library also provides a variety of utility functions useful for test
  programs running as part of an Automake-built package: finding test data
  files, creating temporary files, reporting output from external programs
  running in the background, and similar common problems.

requirements: |
  C TAP Harness requires a C compiler to build.  Any ISO C89 or later C
  compiler on a system supporting the Single UNIX Specification, version 3
  (SUSv3) should be sufficient.  This should not be a problem on any modern
  system.  The test suite and shell library require a Bourne-compatible
  shell.  Outside of the test suite, C TAP Harness has no other
  prerequisites or requirements.

  To run the test suite, you will need Perl plus the Perl module Test::More,

t/data/generate/c-tap-harness/output/readme  view on Meta::CPAN

  easier for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting
  out-of-tree builds to build some test programs, ship others, and run
  them all regardless of what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier
  for test cases to find their supporting files when they run.

  Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
  utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report
  results.  The C library also provides a variety of utility functions
  useful for test programs running as part of an Automake-built package:
  finding test data files, creating temporary files, reporting output from
  external programs running in the background, and similar common
  problems.

REQUIREMENTS

  C TAP Harness requires a C compiler to build.  Any ISO C89 or later C
  compiler on a system supporting the Single UNIX Specification, version 3
  (SUSv3) should be sufficient.  This should not be a problem on any
  modern system.  The test suite and shell library require a
  Bourne-compatible shell.  Outside of the test suite, C TAP Harness has
  no other prerequisites or requirements.

t/data/generate/c-tap-harness/output/readme-md  view on Meta::CPAN

for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting out-of-tree builds
to build some test programs, ship others, and run them all regardless of
what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier for test cases to find
their supporting files when they run.

Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report results.
The C library also provides a variety of utility functions useful for test
programs running as part of an Automake-built package: finding test data
files, creating temporary files, reporting output from external programs
running in the background, and similar common problems.

## Requirements

C TAP Harness requires a C compiler to build.  Any ISO C89 or later C
compiler on a system supporting the Single UNIX Specification, version 3
(SUSv3) should be sufficient.  This should not be a problem on any modern
system.  The test suite and shell library require a Bourne-compatible
shell.  Outside of the test suite, C TAP Harness has no other
prerequisites or requirements.

t/data/generate/c-tap-harness/output/thread  view on Meta::CPAN

for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting out-of-tree builds
to build some test programs, ship others, and run them all regardless of
what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier for test cases to find
their supporting files when they run.

Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report results.
The C library also provides a variety of utility functions useful for test
programs running as part of an Automake-built package: finding test data
files, creating temporary files, reporting output from external programs
running in the background, and similar common problems.

\h2[Requirements]

C TAP Harness requires a C compiler to build.  Any ISO C89 or later C
compiler on a system supporting the Single UNIX Specification, version 3
(SUSv3) should be sufficient.  This should not be a problem on any modern
system.  The test suite and shell library require a Bourne-compatible
shell.  Outside of the test suite, C TAP Harness has no other
prerequisites or requirements.

t/data/spin/input/journal/2011-08/006.th  view on Meta::CPAN

    Yeah, I read this as a teenager and quite liked it.  But I have no
    idea what it's doing on this list; it is in absolutely no way one of
    the best 100 SFF works of all time.  (Well, that's not true; I know
    what it's doing on this list.  People have heard of it and read it.
    But it shouldn't be on this list.)
]
\o[The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley][On the list.]
\n[The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson][Want to read this.]
\ro[Ringworld, by Larry Niven][
    Interesting idea fiction with a great sense of scale.  Shame the
    characters aren't as good as the background.  But it's a good book,
    worth reading.
]
\ro[\link[../../reviews/books/0-441-47812-3.html][The Left Hand Of
    Darkness], by Ursula K. LeGuin][
    A deserved classic of anthropological SF with profound things to say
    about how culture and friendship are constructed.
]

\ro[The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien][
    I love this book, but the first section is hard going if you don't

t/data/spin/input/reviews/books/0-385-49362-2.th  view on Meta::CPAN

goes on about the wonder of absolute mathematical proof and the supposedly
unique way that mathematicians are more rigorous than any other
profession.  I enjoyed the bits of history and connection he uncovers and
explains despite his tone, rather than because of it.  The book is based
on a TV documentary, and I started wondering if some of the dramatic tone
of television carried over into the book where it's more obvious and less
useful.

Another difficulty of aiming at such a broad audience is that Singh can't
dig too deeply into the aspects of this proof that make it so important to
modern mathematics.  Too much background in very difficult math would be
needed, so his choice makes sense, but I have some of that background and
I was wanting more.  Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem by proving the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, a fifty-year-old conjecture about a
connection between elliptic curves and modular forms that had previously
been shown to be equivalent to Fermat's Last Theorem, but which is
considerably more important to the structure of mathematics.  The
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture covers a portion of the Langlands program, a
series of conjectures about a deep unity between very disparate sections
of mathematics that, if proven, would permit techniques of one branch of
mathematics to be used to attack problems in a very different branch.
Singh does cover this, but not in as much detail as I would have liked (I
would have loved a good description of modular forms, for instance), nor
does he talk much about the other aspects of the Langlands program or
about the usefulness of the other theorems Wiles proved in the course of
proving Taniyama-Shimura and Fermat's Last Theorem.

More detail here is probably a difficult request.  From a quick glance
through Wikipedia, it's not clear whether Singh could adequately explain
the impact of the math even to someone with my mathematical background,
and that would be abandoning much of his audience.  Still, \cite[Fermat's
Enigma] left me a bit unsatisfied.

Worth reading, though, particularly for the last portion of the book.  The
detailed story of Wiles's proof is engrossing, dramatic, and matters for
more reasons than just solving a long-standing puzzle.  I'm not a big fan
of Singh's writing style, but he does make the story accessible and
includes several interesting nuggets of mathematical history.

\rating [6]

t/data/spin/output/journal/2011-08/006.html  view on Meta::CPAN

<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Belgariad, by David Eddings</u></strong>: 
    Yeah, I read this as a teenager and quite liked it.  But I have no
    idea what it's doing on this list; it is in absolutely no way one of
    the best 100 SFF works of all time.  (Well, that's not true; I know
    what it's doing on this list.  People have heard of it and read it.
    But it shouldn't be on this list.)</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley</u>: On the list.</li>
<li class="packed">The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson: Want to read this.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>Ringworld, by Larry Niven</u></strong>: 
    Interesting idea fiction with a great sense of scale.  Shame the
    characters aren't as good as the background.  But it's a good book,
    worth reading.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u><a href="../../reviews/books/0-441-47812-3.html">The Left Hand Of
    Darkness</a>, by Ursula K. LeGuin</u></strong>: 
    A deserved classic of anthropological SF with profound things to say
    about how culture and friendship are constructed.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien</u></strong>: 
    I love this book, but the first section is hard going if you don't
    like reading mythology.  Skip ahead if you're struggling; the gems are
    later.</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Once And Future King, by T.H. White</u>: Definitely on the list to read.</li>

t/data/spin/output/journal/debian.rss  view on Meta::CPAN

<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Belgariad, by David Eddings</u></strong>: 
    Yeah, I read this as a teenager and quite liked it.  But I have no
    idea what it's doing on this list; it is in absolutely no way one of
    the best 100 SFF works of all time.  (Well, that's not true; I know
    what it's doing on this list.  People have heard of it and read it.
    But it shouldn't be on this list.)</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley</u>: On the list.</li>
<li class="packed">The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson: Want to read this.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>Ringworld, by Larry Niven</u></strong>: 
    Interesting idea fiction with a great sense of scale.  Shame the
    characters aren't as good as the background.  But it's a good book,
    worth reading.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u><a href="https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/books/0-441-47812-3.html">The Left Hand Of
    Darkness</a>, by Ursula K. LeGuin</u></strong>: 
    A deserved classic of anthropological SF with profound things to say
    about how culture and friendship are constructed.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien</u></strong>: 
    I love this book, but the first section is hard going if you don't
    like reading mythology.  Skip ahead if you're struggling; the gems are
    later.</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Once And Future King, by T.H. White</u>: Definitely on the list to read.</li>

t/data/spin/output/journal/index.html  view on Meta::CPAN

<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Belgariad, by David Eddings</u></strong>: 
    Yeah, I read this as a teenager and quite liked it.  But I have no
    idea what it's doing on this list; it is in absolutely no way one of
    the best 100 SFF works of all time.  (Well, that's not true; I know
    what it's doing on this list.  People have heard of it and read it.
    But it shouldn't be on this list.)</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley</u>: On the list.</li>
<li class="packed">The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson: Want to read this.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>Ringworld, by Larry Niven</u></strong>: 
    Interesting idea fiction with a great sense of scale.  Shame the
    characters aren't as good as the background.  But it's a good book,
    worth reading.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u><a href="https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/books/0-441-47812-3.html">The Left Hand Of
    Darkness</a>, by Ursula K. LeGuin</u></strong>: 
    A deserved classic of anthropological SF with profound things to say
    about how culture and friendship are constructed.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien</u></strong>: 
    I love this book, but the first section is hard going if you don't
    like reading mythology.  Skip ahead if you're struggling; the gems are
    later.</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Once And Future King, by T.H. White</u>: Definitely on the list to read.</li>

t/data/spin/output/journal/index.html  view on Meta::CPAN

profession.  I enjoyed the bits of history and connection he uncovers and
explains despite his tone, rather than because of it.  The book is based
on a TV documentary, and I started wondering if some of the dramatic tone
of television carried over into the book where it's more obvious and less
useful.
</p>

<p>
Another difficulty of aiming at such a broad audience is that Singh can't
dig too deeply into the aspects of this proof that make it so important to
modern mathematics.  Too much background in very difficult math would be
needed, so his choice makes sense, but I have some of that background and
I was wanting more.  Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem by proving the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, a fifty-year-old conjecture about a
connection between elliptic curves and modular forms that had previously
been shown to be equivalent to Fermat's Last Theorem, but which is
considerably more important to the structure of mathematics.  The
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture covers a portion of the Langlands program, a
series of conjectures about a deep unity between very disparate sections
of mathematics that, if proven, would permit techniques of one branch of
mathematics to be used to attack problems in a very different branch.
Singh does cover this, but not in as much detail as I would have liked (I
would have loved a good description of modular forms, for instance), nor
does he talk much about the other aspects of the Langlands program or
about the usefulness of the other theorems Wiles proved in the course of
proving Taniyama-Shimura and Fermat's Last Theorem.
</p>

<p>
More detail here is probably a difficult request.  From a quick glance
through Wikipedia, it's not clear whether Singh could adequately explain
the impact of the math even to someone with my mathematical background,
and that would be abandoning much of his audience.  Still, <cite>Fermat's
Enigma</cite> left me a bit unsatisfied.
</p>

<p>
Worth reading, though, particularly for the last portion of the book.  The
detailed story of Wiles's proof is engrossing, dramatic, and matters for
more reasons than just solving a long-standing puzzle.  I'm not a big fan
of Singh's writing style, but he does make the story accessible and
includes several interesting nuggets of mathematical history.

t/data/spin/output/journal/index.rss  view on Meta::CPAN

<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Belgariad, by David Eddings</u></strong>: 
    Yeah, I read this as a teenager and quite liked it.  But I have no
    idea what it's doing on this list; it is in absolutely no way one of
    the best 100 SFF works of all time.  (Well, that's not true; I know
    what it's doing on this list.  People have heard of it and read it.
    But it shouldn't be on this list.)</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley</u>: On the list.</li>
<li class="packed">The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson: Want to read this.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>Ringworld, by Larry Niven</u></strong>: 
    Interesting idea fiction with a great sense of scale.  Shame the
    characters aren't as good as the background.  But it's a good book,
    worth reading.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u><a href="https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/books/0-441-47812-3.html">The Left Hand Of
    Darkness</a>, by Ursula K. LeGuin</u></strong>: 
    A deserved classic of anthropological SF with profound things to say
    about how culture and friendship are constructed.</li>
<li class="packed"><strong><u>The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien</u></strong>: 
    I love this book, but the first section is hard going if you don't
    like reading mythology.  Skip ahead if you're struggling; the gems are
    later.</li>
<li class="packed"><u>The Once And Future King, by T.H. White</u>: Definitely on the list to read.</li>

t/data/spin/output/journal/index.rss  view on Meta::CPAN

profession.  I enjoyed the bits of history and connection he uncovers and
explains despite his tone, rather than because of it.  The book is based
on a TV documentary, and I started wondering if some of the dramatic tone
of television carried over into the book where it's more obvious and less
useful.
</p>

<p>
Another difficulty of aiming at such a broad audience is that Singh can't
dig too deeply into the aspects of this proof that make it so important to
modern mathematics.  Too much background in very difficult math would be
needed, so his choice makes sense, but I have some of that background and
I was wanting more.  Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem by proving the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, a fifty-year-old conjecture about a
connection between elliptic curves and modular forms that had previously
been shown to be equivalent to Fermat's Last Theorem, but which is
considerably more important to the structure of mathematics.  The
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture covers a portion of the Langlands program, a
series of conjectures about a deep unity between very disparate sections
of mathematics that, if proven, would permit techniques of one branch of
mathematics to be used to attack problems in a very different branch.
Singh does cover this, but not in as much detail as I would have liked (I
would have loved a good description of modular forms, for instance), nor
does he talk much about the other aspects of the Langlands program or
about the usefulness of the other theorems Wiles proved in the course of
proving Taniyama-Shimura and Fermat's Last Theorem.
</p>

<p>
More detail here is probably a difficult request.  From a quick glance
through Wikipedia, it's not clear whether Singh could adequately explain
the impact of the math even to someone with my mathematical background,
and that would be abandoning much of his audience.  Still, <cite>Fermat's
Enigma</cite> left me a bit unsatisfied.
</p>

<p>
Worth reading, though, particularly for the last portion of the book.  The
detailed story of Wiles's proof is engrossing, dramatic, and matters for
more reasons than just solving a long-standing puzzle.  I'm not a big fan
of Singh's writing style, but he does make the story accessible and
includes several interesting nuggets of mathematical history.

t/data/spin/output/journal/reviews.rss  view on Meta::CPAN

profession.  I enjoyed the bits of history and connection he uncovers and
explains despite his tone, rather than because of it.  The book is based
on a TV documentary, and I started wondering if some of the dramatic tone
of television carried over into the book where it's more obvious and less
useful.
</p>

<p>
Another difficulty of aiming at such a broad audience is that Singh can't
dig too deeply into the aspects of this proof that make it so important to
modern mathematics.  Too much background in very difficult math would be
needed, so his choice makes sense, but I have some of that background and
I was wanting more.  Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem by proving the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, a fifty-year-old conjecture about a
connection between elliptic curves and modular forms that had previously
been shown to be equivalent to Fermat's Last Theorem, but which is
considerably more important to the structure of mathematics.  The
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture covers a portion of the Langlands program, a
series of conjectures about a deep unity between very disparate sections
of mathematics that, if proven, would permit techniques of one branch of
mathematics to be used to attack problems in a very different branch.
Singh does cover this, but not in as much detail as I would have liked (I
would have loved a good description of modular forms, for instance), nor
does he talk much about the other aspects of the Langlands program or
about the usefulness of the other theorems Wiles proved in the course of
proving Taniyama-Shimura and Fermat's Last Theorem.
</p>

<p>
More detail here is probably a difficult request.  From a quick glance
through Wikipedia, it's not clear whether Singh could adequately explain
the impact of the math even to someone with my mathematical background,
and that would be abandoning much of his audience.  Still, <cite>Fermat's
Enigma</cite> left me a bit unsatisfied.
</p>

<p>
Worth reading, though, particularly for the last portion of the book.  The
detailed story of Wiles's proof is engrossing, dramatic, and matters for
more reasons than just solving a long-standing puzzle.  I'm not a big fan
of Singh's writing style, but he does make the story accessible and
includes several interesting nuggets of mathematical history.

t/data/spin/output/reviews/books/0-385-49362-2.html  view on Meta::CPAN

profession.  I enjoyed the bits of history and connection he uncovers and
explains despite his tone, rather than because of it.  The book is based
on a TV documentary, and I started wondering if some of the dramatic tone
of television carried over into the book where it's more obvious and less
useful.
</p>

<p>
Another difficulty of aiming at such a broad audience is that Singh can't
dig too deeply into the aspects of this proof that make it so important to
modern mathematics.  Too much background in very difficult math would be
needed, so his choice makes sense, but I have some of that background and
I was wanting more.  Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem by proving the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, a fifty-year-old conjecture about a
connection between elliptic curves and modular forms that had previously
been shown to be equivalent to Fermat's Last Theorem, but which is
considerably more important to the structure of mathematics.  The
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture covers a portion of the Langlands program, a
series of conjectures about a deep unity between very disparate sections
of mathematics that, if proven, would permit techniques of one branch of
mathematics to be used to attack problems in a very different branch.
Singh does cover this, but not in as much detail as I would have liked (I
would have loved a good description of modular forms, for instance), nor
does he talk much about the other aspects of the Langlands program or
about the usefulness of the other theorems Wiles proved in the course of
proving Taniyama-Shimura and Fermat's Last Theorem.
</p>

<p>
More detail here is probably a difficult request.  From a quick glance
through Wikipedia, it's not clear whether Singh could adequately explain
the impact of the math even to someone with my mathematical background,
and that would be abandoning much of his audience.  Still, <cite>Fermat's
Enigma</cite> left me a bit unsatisfied.
</p>

<p>
Worth reading, though, particularly for the last portion of the book.  The
detailed story of Wiles's proof is engrossing, dramatic, and matters for
more reasons than just solving a long-standing puzzle.  I'm not a big fan
of Singh's writing style, but he does make the story accessible and
includes several interesting nuggets of mathematical history.

t/data/spin/sitemap/complex  view on Meta::CPAN

      /notes/debian/sbuild.html: sbuild with btrfs
      /notes/debian/firebird.html: Debian on HP Firebird 802
      /notes/debian/shuttle.html: Debian on Shuttle SN85G4
      /notes/debian/jce-policy.html: Java JCE Policy Packaging
      /notes/debian/kernel-build.html: Debian Kernel Build
      /notes/debian/qmail.html: qmail on Debian
      /notes/debian/quotas.html: Enabling Quotas on Debian
    /notes/kerberos/: Kerberos
    /notes/perl-sig.html: Perl Signature Quine
    /notes/languages/: Programming Languages
      /notes/languages/background.html: Programming Background
      ---
      /notes/languages/python.html: Notes on Python
      /notes/languages/java.html: Notes on Java
    /notes/xemacs-mt.html: XEmacs and Movable Type
    /notes/scrum/: Scrum
    /notes/rpath.html: Shared Library Search Paths
    /notes/puppet.html: Small-Scale Puppet
    /notes/bundle.html: System Templating with Bundle
    /notes/solaris/: Solaris
      /notes/solaris/dns-cache.html: Flushing nscd's Cache

t/data/spin/sitemap/complex.html  view on Meta::CPAN

      <li><a href="notes/debian/shuttle.html">Debian on Shuttle SN85G4</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/debian/jce-policy.html">Java JCE Policy Packaging</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/debian/kernel-build.html">Debian Kernel Build</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/debian/qmail.html">qmail on Debian</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/debian/quotas.html">Enabling Quotas on Debian</a></li>
      </ul>
    <li><a href="notes/kerberos/">Kerberos</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/perl-sig.html">Perl Signature Quine</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/languages/">Programming Languages</a></li>
      <ul>
      <li><a href="notes/languages/background.html">Programming Background</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/languages/python.html">Notes on Python</a></li>
      <li><a href="notes/languages/java.html">Notes on Java</a></li>
      </ul>
    <li><a href="notes/xemacs-mt.html">XEmacs and Movable Type</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/scrum/">Scrum</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/rpath.html">Shared Library Search Paths</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/puppet.html">Small-Scale Puppet</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/bundle.html">System Templating with Bundle</a></li>
    <li><a href="notes/solaris/">Solaris</a></li>
      <ul>

t/data/update/c-tap-harness/docknot.yaml  view on Meta::CPAN

  for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting out-of-tree builds
  to build some test programs, ship others, and run them all regardless of
  what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier for test cases to find
  their supporting files when they run.

  Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
  utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report results.
  The C library also provides a variety of utility functions useful for test
  programs running as part of an Automake-built package: finding test data
  files, creating temporary files, reporting output from external programs
  running in the background, and similar common problems.
distribution:
  section: devel
  tarname: c-tap-harness
  version: c-tap-harness
docs:
  api:
  - name: bail
    title: bail and sysbail
  - name: bmalloc
    title: bmalloc, bcalloc, brealloc, bstrdup, and bstrndup

t/data/update/c-tap-harness/old/description  view on Meta::CPAN

for packages using Autoconf and Automake and supporting out-of-tree builds
to build some test programs, ship others, and run them all regardless of
what tree they're in.  It also makes it easier for test cases to find
their supporting files when they run.

Also included in this package are C and shell libraries that provide
utility functions for writing test scripts that use TAP to report results.
The C library also provides a variety of utility functions useful for test
programs running as part of an Automake-built package: finding test data
files, creating temporary files, reporting output from external programs
running in the background, and similar common problems.