This looks an awful lot like the pair I got, and are currently both hosting my VMs after a 64GB RAM upgrade. And with the £100 voucher right now on the page you linked to, you can't go wrong. Heck, the same page has the same thing but with 16GB, at £315 and an extra £80 off. Personally I'd go with that, and buy a separate 64GB kit (2x32GB DDR4).

v1 - CodeProject[^] M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

And a couple of years later, there will be nobody left, that can really repair things when something goes south. M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

Daniel Pfeffer wrote: That algorithm is mathematically equivalent to the algorithm of "calculate average, then use that to calculate standard deviation", but is numerically not equivalent. Roundoff errors can cause the variance to become negative, causing an error when calculating the standatd deviation. Not sure what you are referring to. My degree is in mathematics. I used a proof to rederive the summation series to intermittent summations. (I also coded it including storage.) So yes I am sure that the algorithm that I used was doing the correct calculation. Daniel Pfeffer wrote: The idea was to save computation time. Ah. So just to be clear I did not 'use' an existing algorithm. I used mathematics to derive a different way to compute it and used a proof to demonstrate the equivalence. Daniel Pfeffer wrote: These are two of the reasons why advanced courses are necessary, even when one is dealing with "simple" issues such as these. Rather certain that none of the computer science classes that I took would have allowed me to solve the problem. But as I pointed out that was one single time in a career that has spanned decades. Daniel Pfeffer wrote: This requires a certain amount of skill, It requires experience. But experience also is not a guarantee of success. And a college degree absolutely is not an indicator of success in doing that.

The thousands-of-programmers model assumes that the most time-consuming part of software development is typing the code into an editor. Designing the software is really the biggest piece of work, and it is more difficult to serialize because of the need to agree on a contract between any two communicating parts. Building software as pipelines or loosely coupled modules can help with this, but there is only so much available concurrency in the design process.

I'm still using a set of Lindstrom side cutters that date from the mid 80s. Still sharp and cutting true.

The recreation of the account might have played more role than obvious. Like if it was bowling or throwing darts or something, maybe it was just too busy.

Oh a coder scrummed all in stand up left work one evening fair, And one could tell by the way he walked his story points were up there...