search for: controversy

I booted into X11 and have networking working and a kernel compile = running. SMP and PAE should be less than a day away. This completes = the proof of concept, I believe ;) I didn't cc LKML since I didn't want to spam them with graphics. Very = controversial graphics. Hopefully you appreciate the humor. Zach -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was

When one is doing simple regression and needs to force a zero intercept ( for whatever reason. I realize it's a controversial issue ), then subtracting the means of the left hand side and the right hand side from themselves does the trick. Does anyone know if there is a similar trick when the RHS has two variables ? Thanks. -------------------------------------------------------- This is

HI, theres a lot of controversy related to this topic, my company is thinking on me to take the astricon bootcamp, but want to know if it is really whorty, 3000 USD is a huge amount of money to spend, plus the hotel, food and transportation, ive already deployed some asterisk?s pbx and have experience with it using analog tdm car...

I'm new here, but I feel like chiming in, I hope my opinions are welcome. At first glance at this thread it seems unnecessary to argue about the necessity of these checks when when the option exists to give users the choice. Adding configuration option(s) for users who wish to bypass these checks could allow experienced users to do what they need to, and less experienced users could

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: >> I've just grabbed a copy of SVN head for libogg and 'make check' >> is failing: >The breakage happened in this commit: > > r17098 | gmaxwell | 2010-03-29 16:35:11 +1100 (Mon, 29 Mar 2010) | 1 line > Firstly, is gmaxwell on this list? [snip] > Secondly should be be trying controvertial changes in HEAD? Surely thats > what

I am evaluating rsync for the mirroring of a website and associated database. To exercise it and establish the correct run string I need I am running tests LOCALLY between two test directories. I have a /scratch/temp/Departure and a /scratch/temp/Arrival trees. I apply changes to the Departure tree, run rsync, and do a diff -r. Now I delete a file in Departure rm Departure/Quattro/uno.file

On Feb 28, 2012, at 6:34 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Howard, high-level feedback from you would be particularly appreciated as I would love to contribute this to libc++ when the time is right. Does the enclosed implementation implement this part of N3333: http://www.open-std.org/Jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3333.html#per.process.seed ? That to me seems like potentially the most

LLVM doesn't build out of the box on Cygwin, because Cygwin defines uint32_t as "unsigned long" rather than "unsigned int". The attached patch allows me to build head of svn (rev 62510) on Cygwin using GCC 4. Can this be committed please? I realise that the DataTypes.h.in part might be controversial. Also, there's probably a better place to put it, but I'm not

I am currently using Cyrus IMAPd, and been using it for a long time, the main reason being that I want an IMAP server with nice server-side filtering, which Cyrus provides via Sieve. Given that Sieve is integrated with Squirrelmail, all is good. Or is it? Cyrus IMAPd is powerful, but it's a complete mess to upgrade, either when upgrading the software per se, or when upgrading the whole

I don't see any controversy for the preliminary requirement of removing BinaryOperator::isFNeg() and friends, so start with that? That work may reveal other potential regressions that we can patch in advance too. Other than that, I think there's really only a question of do we want 1 or both of fneg and fneg_constrained...

On Jul 8, 2008, at 4:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, David Greene wrote: >>> Since I think it really is a part of the LLVM internals, I don't >>> think >>> that mangling it with a prefix is the right way to go. This would >>> significantly increase verbosity in the code and would be generally >>> detrimental. >>

To avoid angry replies, let me first say that I know that the use of Type III sums of squares is controversial, and that some statisticians recommend instead that significance be judged using the non-marginal terms in the ANOVA. However, given that type III SS is also demanded by some… is there a function (equivalent to drop1 for lm) to obtain type III sums of squares for mixed models using the

Hi, I tripped over the effects of commit 660854 [0] when moving some infrastructure from Debian 7 to 8 (openssh 6.0 to 6.7); our ansible module used "return 0, but no output" for 'host not found in known_hosts file', and now complains that ssh-keygen is returning an error status. I don't think this change in API was announced in the release notes? i.e. ssh-keygen -F

Hi all, I tried 1.3.0pre4 with ICL on Windows and found some issues. Not sure if this is the right place to submit patches, but someone suggested this on the apparently dead SourceForge patch tracker. The first two are quite straight forward: - The ICL patch fixes a typo in bitmath.h and adds FLAC__bitwriter_write_zeroes to the external declarations in bitwriter.c. - The Ogg patch replaces

I was hoping to introduce a new top level library in llvm/lib/Frontend for code that is (mainly) used by LLVM frontends but not by one exclusively. At first, I would place the OpenMP-IR-Builder [1] (and related code [0]) there. This Builder translates "OpenMP directives" to LLVM-IR and is supposed to be reused in Flang. First, I tried to place the OpenMP-IR-Builder into llvm/IR, right

Here''s a question for those well-versed in rforum or engines -- or both, ideally :) I''ve spent some time today turning RForum into an engine, using rails 1.0, engines trunk, and rforum 0.1 (as rforum trunk didn''t appear to work out of the box). My rforum engine works, but only when I do two things that I found by trial and error: 1) All rforum controllers subclass

>> I'm already working on this myself. Would you be interested in having >> this work contributed back to LLVM? > > If this were to better support target independent languages, it would > be very useful. If you're just trying to *reduce* the endianness > assumptions that leak through, I don't think it's a good approach. > There is just no way to solve

...40-23892910(O) E-mail: sudheer.joseph at yahoo.com; sjo at incois.gov.in. Web- http://oppamthadathil.tripod.com --------------* --------------- "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Martin Luther King, Jr. "What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us. What we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal." - Albert Pines

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:33 PM, James Molloy <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk> wrote: > But you're surely not suggesting that lld will segfault as an error > handling mode in production? > The document clearly states that (a) it is user's responsibility to give sane object files, and (b) a corrupted file may cause a fatal error or SEGV. > You say this was decided in a

If I am not mistaken, there are two things that are becoming clear: 1. For email, nobody seems to be against Discourse as long as the mailing lists are still a supported way to participate. So this seems non-controversial. 2. For IRC, people seem to be happy with switching to a more modern solution, but Discord is largely disliked by a significant portion of respondents. So perhaps we can focus