search for: _previous_

On 11/06/2020 14:04, Bob Wooden via samba wrote: > In my previous AD domain, my FQDN was a non-registered (fake) domain > that has worked for years. For example "fakedomainname.intials", like > "domain.dt". This started, back in the day when we were suspose to > stop using *.local (like MS always suggested.) It worked so I never > looked back. It sounds from

...s. This is quite useful, but could be even more useful if it was possible to use the variable later on the same line it matched. For example, I would want to write this: ; CHECK: bic [[REG:r[0-9]+]], [[REG]], #3 But I currently can't because [[REG]] will only match a REG variable defined on a _previous_ line. As the FileCheck ref manual (http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html) mentions, there are known workarounds like having two separate CHECK lines. However, this is a hacky and inelegant solution that makes code less readable. I hope the rationale for the code above is clear: I want m...

...(arg-type)size_t% before, %(arg-type)String% text, - %(arg-type)Integer% image = -1, - %(arg-type)Integer% selImage = -1, - %(arg-type)Object% item_data = @nil@) </del><ins>+Inserts an item after a given one (_previous_). </ins><span class="cx"> </span><del>-Inserts an item after a given one (_previous_) or before one identified by its position (_before_). </del><ins>+The _image_ and _selImage_ parameters are an index within +the normal image list specifying the image...

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:22 PM, James Zern <jzern at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 1:07 PM, James Zern <jzern at google.com> wrote: >> Just an attempt to avoid overflows with an explicit check, I don't know if >> there's a better way to identify corrupt input here. >> >> James Zern (2): >> op_pcm_seek: fix int64 overflow

...rations[pi] > after the subtraction and we will trim all of the packets on the page. But > with your patch, once cur_page_gp comes early enough to cause an overflow, > you'll set diff=0, and then we go into the other case in the loop, where we > propagate timestamps forward from the _previous_ page, ignoring the > timestamp of the current page. Now, since the timestamps are clearly > invalid, maybe it doesn't matter much which we do, but it seems like it's > kind of an arbitrary place to suddenly switch from discarding all of the > packets to instead playing them back...

...) was transfered multible times: to be more exact, it was ever second matching tree [the longest file survived]. rsync -vvvv told me a bit more concrete what happened: removing duplicate name %s from file list %d clean_flist() in flist.c announces that he will remove the duplicated entry of the _previous_ list. but the file is beeing removed from the current list, while retaining the file from the previous list. thus, when the next file list is checked against this one (now "previous"), the file did not occur in the list anymore (but in the previous-previous), and it will be kept. this lea...

...ave diff > durations[pi] after the subtraction and we will trim all of the packets on the page. But with your patch, once cur_page_gp comes early enough to cause an overflow, you'll set diff=0, and then we go into the other case in the loop, where we propagate timestamps forward from the _previous_ page, ignoring the timestamp of the current page. Now, since the timestamps are clearly invalid, maybe it doesn't matter much which we do, but it seems like it's kind of an arbitrary place to suddenly switch from discarding all of the packets to instead playing them back with timestamp...

...d be even more useful > if it was possible to use the variable later on the same line it > matched. For example, I would want to write this: > > ; CHECK: bic [[REG:r[0-9]+]], [[REG]], #3 > > But I currently can't because [[REG]] will only match a REG variable > defined on a _previous_ line. As the FileCheck ref manual > (http://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html) mentions, there are > known workarounds like having two separate CHECK lines. However, this > is a hacky and inelegant solution that makes code less readable. > > I hope the rationale for the code...

...n><del>- %(arg-type)TreeItemData% data = @NULL@) </del><ins>+ %(arg-type)Object% item_data = @nil@) </ins><span class="cx"> </span><span class="cx"> Inserts an item after a given one (_previous_) or before one identified by its position (_before_). </span><span class="cx"> _before_ must be less than the number of children. </span><span class="lines">@@ -781,7 +786,7 @@ </span><span class="cx"> "TreeItemId":treeite...