Reply to: Forgive me for my sins

[TheMonkey]

Ok installed and working! Works perfectly apart from one problem:

It crashes if you let the mac go to sleep whilst Parallels is running in full screen mode

At least I can run Sage so I can port my accounts over now.

[Sysman]

Fantastic - that is EXACTLY what I've been looking for. Thanks for the heads up.

You are welcome. Another plus for Parallels Desktop is that for Bootcamp you need a CD with XP SP2, you can't load XP SP1 then upgrade.

So if you don't have the XP SP2 distribution, you can save on buying one.

[Sysman in cheapskate contractor mode.]

[Churchill]

Put some "Beep" commands in...

[hyperD]

Have I mentioned that I now take into account locality of processor cache when choosing or designing my own most performant algorithm?

MMMMMMMUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!! !! (whimper)

[TheMonkey]

You should also look at Parallels Desktop for Mac. It gives you a virtual machine, rather than the dual boot solution of Bootcamp.

http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/

"Use any full version of Windows (3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, Me, 2000, NT, XP, 2003), any Linux distribution, FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2, eComStation, or MS-DOS in secure virtual machines running alongside – not instead of - Mac OS X."

Fantastic - that is EXACTLY what I've been looking for. Thanks for the heads up.

[Sysman]

I wouldn't have a Mac if it wasn't x86. I only bought one as the purchase risk is mitigated by the fact that it runs windows as well via Bootcamp.

You should also look at Parallels Desktop for Mac. It gives you a virtual machine, rather than the dual boot solution of Bootcamp.

http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/

"Use any full version of Windows (3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, Me, 2000, NT, XP, 2003), any Linux distribution, FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2, eComStation, or MS-DOS in secure virtual machines running alongside – not instead of - Mac OS X."

[AtW]

Otherwise you'll destroy my fantasy that IT has been a piece of piss over the last 10 years....

Have I mentioned that I now take into account locality of processor cache when choosing or designing my own most performant algorithm?

[hyperD]

TheMonkey and AtW - stop scaring me. You should be talking about dragging and dropping controls in the design screen in VS .net - not all this complicated stuff like threads and mutexes.

Otherwise you'll destroy my fantasy that IT has been a piece of piss over the last 10 years....

[TheMonkey]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Mods - put this into Technical, FFS.

[Fleetwood]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Mods - put this into Technical, FFS.

[AtW]

This sucks badly - debugger really helps in compex code, I wasted lots of time debugging function with inclined assembly blindly

Anyway, these things can happen - overall .net is suprisingly good with high performance, it could have been a lot worse.

[TheMonkey]

It happena only when the debugger is attached, which leaves a good catch-22 situation. Basically I end up having to code blindly.

[AtW]

Does it happen when you run it standalone? The bug that I found was in framework itself, VS 2005 is a lot better IDE than VS 2003 that is slow in some debugging scenarios. The only thing that really pissed me off about both is that you can't debug C++ code with inlined assembly, even when stepping in Disassembly window!

[TheMonkey]

Either then or when a thread is created.

It's definitely a race / deadlock under VS2005 as if you use the command line debugger it doesn't hang.

[AtW]

Does it hang when trying to bind to socket, is it under VS 2005 or something else?