spicycode

# 0 is too far from ` ;)
set -g base-index 1

# Automatically set window title
set-window-option -g automatic-rename on
set-option -g set-titles on

#set -g default-terminal screen-256color
set -g status-keys vi
set -g history-limit 10000

MarcusVoelker

#include <iostream>

const unsigned long long SEC = 1000L*1000L*1000L;

inline unsigned long long timespecTo64( const timespec &_time ) {
    return ( _time.tv_sec*SEC + _time.tv_nsec );
}

void runTest(clockid_t clkid, std::string const& name)
{

dpryden

import java.io.IOException;
import java.net.URLClassLoader;
import java.nio.file.Files;
import java.nio.file.Paths;
import java.nio.file.Path;

/**
 * Example demonstrating a ClassLoader leak.
 *
 * <p>To see it in action, copy this file to a temp directory somewhere,

steveklabnik

#![feature(collections)]

use std::io::prelude::*;
use std::fs::File;
use std::io::BufReader;

fn main() {
    let args: Vec<String> = std::env::args().collect();
    let filename = args[1].clone();

rianhunter

/*
  This benchmark shows how indirect function calls have nearly
  the same overhead costs as direct function calls.
  
  This is comparing apples to apples, factoring out the savings
  due to inlining optimizations that direct calls usually afford.
    
  From this, it seems that inlining and other generic interprocedual
  optimizations are the main drivers of direct function call optimization,
  not the direct call itself.

alblue

This project has moved to https://github.com/alblue/com.bandlem.jmh.microopts