Timeline for Combine [l2-cache] and [l3-cache] into [cpu-cache]?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

14 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Mar 20, 2017 at 10:04	history	edited	CommunityBot		replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
Jun 14, 2012 at 10:34	history	tweeted			twitter.com/#!/StackSuper_User/status/213217757578272768
Jun 13, 2012 at 4:43	vote	accept	Bob
Jun 13, 2012 at 4:42	history	edited	Sathyajith BhatMod		edited tags
May 25, 2012 at 8:39	answer	added	Bob		timeline score: 0
May 25, 2012 at 8:38	answer	added	Bob		timeline score: 6
May 25, 2012 at 8:37	history	edited	Bob	CC BY-SA 3.0	deleted 235 characters in body; edited title
May 23, 2012 at 7:33	history	edited	Bob	CC BY-SA 3.0	added 401 characters in body
May 21, 2012 at 4:42	comment	added	Daniel Beck Mod		You're responding to what I didn't write. I just wrote that question count shouldn't (yet) be held against these tags.
May 21, 2012 at 4:25	comment	added	Bob		@DanielBeck Even then `cpu-cache` would be better; otherwise the tags are just being too specific. Are you saying we should make a `l1-cache`? How about a `l4-cache` for a question asking why they aren't used? The level of cache the question is about, if necessary, can be in the question itself.
May 20, 2012 at 17:34	comment	added	Daniel Beck Mod		Tag creation has a minimum rep requirement, and l3-cache was just creates yesterday. There might be quite a few other fuitable questions whose askers didn't have the rep. I wouldn't hold the question count against those tags.
May 20, 2012 at 4:43	comment	added	Mahmoud Al-Qudsi		I'd imagine the distinction would only (and even then very rarely) be useful on SO, but certainly not here on SU.
May 19, 2012 at 21:52	comment	added	Ben Voigt		For what it's worth, I agree with making those synonyms of `cpu-cache`.
May 19, 2012 at 16:28	history	asked	Bob	CC BY-SA 3.0