search for: anachronism

...nfig.h rsync 2.6.9 configuration successful ~/src/rsync-2.6.9$ make /opt/intel/compilo_9/l_cc_c_9.1.042/bin/icc -c99 -I. -I. -g -O2 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -Wall -W -c rsync.c -o rsync.o icc: Command line remark: option '-W' not supported proto.h(224): remark #310: old-style parameter list (anachronism) void setup_iconv(); ^ rsync.c(33): remark #1419: external declaration in primary source file extern int verbose; ^ rsync.c(34): remark #1419: external declaration in primary source file extern int dry_run; ^ rsync.c(35): remark #1419: external declaration...

...t a comment explaining what "UnitAtATime" means :-) > > If UnitAtATime is false this means that you are optimizing functions as you are > generating them, rather than first generating all functions and other globals > and only then optimizing. It's basically a historical anachronism coming from > the way GCC used to work. Thanks for explaining. Why not redefine it from historical anachronism to architectural flag, that indicates you may generate more code with the same functions and globals later? And then, you could pass the same flag to createStandardLTOPasses, and that...

When a new version of Samba is posted, is the HOWTO COllection updated, or does the Samba Team rely on the community to spot anachronisms and report them as bugs? I'm struggling with a new install of Samba that's more complex than I've tried before, and I keep the two Samba dead-tree books open on my desk -- but if the online docs in the tarball are more current than the books, these heavy things are going up on my sh...

...OTEs which bitches about attempting to change the search path using require(). In my case, I am repeating a package dependency for "methods" package in my .onLoad() function. Can this scenario (based on something B. Ripley discussed many years ago) no longer occur? Just another R package anachronism? Was I really modifying the search path by repeating a DESCRIPTION dependency? .onLoad <- function(libname, pkgname) { ## In case namespace is loaded (via import) by package that ## doesn't depend on S4 methods and used in a session with ## non-default set of packages. requ...

...was able to install them and so now the update.packages() works. I still have a couple of issues: 1) a lot of packages are not available for R 2.14.0. 2) When compiling I occasionally get compilation errors - for example: "../inst/include/Rcpp/stats/random/rhyper.h", line 31: Warning (Anachronism): Formal argument gen of type double(*)(double,double,double) in call to Rcpp::Vector<14>::Vector<double, double, double>(const int&, double(*)(double,double,double), const double&, const double&, const double&) is being passed extern "C" double(*)(double,doubl...

Hello all, I'm new to the list, but have done quite a bit of researching before regarding the support of Mac OS X specific features (resource forks, extended attributes, ACLs, file creation & modification date). By reading the archives, I get the impression that the current version of rsync 3.0.0pre8 is quite far in this respect. At least it sounds so, and I thank the developers

...laining what "UnitAtATime" means :-) >> >> If UnitAtATime is false this means that you are optimizing functions as you are >> generating them, rather than first generating all functions and other globals >> and only then optimizing. It's basically a historical anachronism coming from >> the way GCC used to work. > > Thanks for explaining. > > Why not redefine it from historical anachronism to architectural flag, that indicates you may generate more code with the same functions and globals later? And then, you could pass the same flag to createStand...

...werCall() and LowerCallTo()? I noticed the comment on LowerCallTo() that implies it should be merged into SelectionDAGISel when all targets are using LowerCall (which I believe they are)? > > I believe Dan has some thoughts in this topic. That FIXME comment about LowerCallTo is probably an anachronism, and no longer relevant given the changes that that code has been through. LowerCallTo is currently a wrapper around LowerCall which various things need. All targets which support calls are using LowerCall. Dan

Hi, I plug my laptop in different networks and use the following hack to configure automatically shorewall for trusted/untrusted networks: In /etc/shorewall/params: # none is a dummy zone associated to the loopback interface NONE="none:0.0.0.0" # Network scheme, automatically detected by intuitively NETWORK_SCHEME="$(cat /etc/network/scheme 2>/dev/null)" case

...I noticed the comment on LowerCallTo() that > implies it should be merged into SelectionDAGISel when all targets are using > LowerCall (which I believe they are)? > > > > I believe Dan has some thoughts in this topic. > > That FIXME comment about LowerCallTo is probably an anachronism, > and no longer relevant given the changes that that code has been > through. LowerCallTo is currently a wrapper around LowerCall > which various things need. All targets which support calls are > using LowerCall. > > Dan -------------------------------------------------------...

...on LowerCallTo() that >> implies it should be merged into SelectionDAGISel when all targets are using >> LowerCall (which I believe they are)? >>> >>> I believe Dan has some thoughts in this topic. >> >> That FIXME comment about LowerCallTo is probably an anachronism, >> and no longer relevant given the changes that that code has been >> through. LowerCallTo is currently a wrapper around LowerCall >> which various things need. All targets which support calls are >> using LowerCall. >> >> Dan > > > ----------------...

...uggestion: what about a comment explaining what "UnitAtATime" means :-) If UnitAtATime is false this means that you are optimizing functions as you are generating them, rather than first generating all functions and other globals and only then optimizing. It's basically a historical anachronism coming from the way GCC used to work. > Even then, my runtime function prorotypes are still being stripped away by the GlobalDCE added by createStandardLTOPasses. Sure, and why not? Unused prototypes are not used for anything, they won't turn up in the generated code for example. > So...

...Web browser support for open formats is increasing, thanks to Mozilla Firefox, so offering the right tools on the server end to enable publishers to adopt these open formats is key. It would be wonderful if, in a few years, proprietary multimedia technology on the web will be considered an awkward anachronism people had to put up with in the 1990's. Apart from introducing my project, I would also like to use this message to quickly introduce myself to the community. I am a 22 year old programmer from the Netherlands, currently attending Law School at Tilburg University. My background is in web deve...

When I tried to use the setenv command to set the default text editor for subversion, I found it was missing how can I install it or enable it in CentOS 5 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080117/f78f52e5/attachment-0002.html>

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Cameron McInally <cameron.mcinally at nyu.edu>wrote: > This is quite a conundrum to me. Yes, I agree with you on the C/C++ > Standards interpretation. However, the x86-64 expectations are orthogonal. > I find that other compilers, including GCC, will trap by default at high > optimization levels on x86-64 for this test case. Hardly scientific, but

Hello and happy new year, I'm using LLVM to JIT-compile the XL programming language. I've recently added a whole-program optimization phase that gives excellent results, but I noticed that the StripDeadPrototypesPass was removing all references to my runtime support functions. Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try again. Suggestion:

...t; implies it should be merged into SelectionDAGISel when all targets are > using > >> LowerCall (which I believe they are)? > >>> > >>> I believe Dan has some thoughts in this topic. > >> > >> That FIXME comment about LowerCallTo is probably an anachronism, > >> and no longer relevant given the changes that that code has been > >> through. LowerCallTo is currently a wrapper around LowerCall > >> which various things need. All targets which support calls are > >> using LowerCall. > >> > >> Dan >...

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2534 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/attachments/20010425/d4b27ac7/attachment.bin

On Apr 19, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > > From: Evan Cheng [mailto:evan.cheng at apple.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 10:47 AM > To: Justin Holewinski > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; Vinod Grover > Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [PATCH][RFC] Add extra arguments to TargetLowering::LowerCall() so targets have more context in which

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18 at gmail.com>wrote: ... > Per C and C++, integer division by 0 is undefined. That means, if it > happens, the compiler is free to do whatever it wants. It is perfectly > legal for LLVM to define r to be, say, 42 in this code; it is not required > to preserve the fact that the idiv instruction on x86 and x86-64 will