search for: anachronisms

I got numerous warnings when building rsync on IA64 (Itanium-2) using Intel C/C++ compiler (see attached). Is this expected? Thanks, Michael -------------- next part -------------- Script started on Fri 21 Sep 2007 06:14:05 PM BST ~/src$ ls -alt total 222884 -rw-r--r-- 1 mccssmb2 mcc101 0 Sep 21 18:14 build_rsync drwxr-xr-x 8 mccssmb2 mcc101 4096 Sep 21 18:14 . -rw-r--r-- 1

On 6 janv. 2011, at 19:00, llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: >> 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. > > why is that a problem? Because I have pointers to

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 she...

As I was running "R CMD check" on one of my older packages (matlab), I was attempting to fix one of the NOTEs 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

Well, I was able to build R 2.14.0 on my Solaris x86 machine, with a lot of work and some help. Thanks! At first the update.packages() would not work because some of the .so files that came with R were 32 - not 64 bit. I 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

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

Hi Christophe, >>> Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try again. Suggestion: 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 >>

On Apr 19, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > 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:

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

In response to this discussion, I've prepared the attached patch as an initial prototype for the LowerCall/LowerCallTo change. All of the information currently needed by the back-ends, and the extra information needed by the NVPTX back-end, is now wrapped in a CallLoweringInfo struct. The various SelectionDAG classes have been modified so any calls to TargetLowering::LowerCallTo use this

Thanks. This is going in the right direction IMHO. Obviously, please make sure you add comments to the data structure and convert all the targets first. Also, please don't forget to send an email to llvmdev to warn owners of all the out-of-tree targets about the ABI change. Evan On May 15, 2012, at 6:56 AM, Justin Holewinski <jholewinski at nvidia.com> wrote: > In response to this

Hi Christophe, > 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. why is that a problem? > Apparently, this depends on the oddly-named UnitAtATime parameter. Set it to false. Try

Hello, In the following months, I am participating in the Google Summer of Code (GSoC). My project evolves around improving web streaming for open media formats and is mentored by Conrad Parker. The goal of the project is to write a FastCGI module that accepts ranged requests for smaller segments of media resources, using the liboggz library to perform the actual Ogg crunching. There are a lot of

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:

> -----Original Message----- > From: Evan Cheng [mailto:evan.cheng at apple.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 5:30 PM > To: Justin Holewinski > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [PATCH][RFC] Add extra arguments to > TargetLowering::LowerCall() so targets have more context in which to > construct call chains > >

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