search for: craig

Hi all, I''ve upgraded my system to Rails 1.1.1 successfully. After much looking I haven''t found out how to migrate an existing application to a new rails version though. What is the procedure, if any, for upgrading the application I''ve developed in 1.0? Is there a script I need to run? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hi Craig, thanks for digging into this. So InstCombine is the wrong place for fixing PR34474. Can you give me a hint where such an optimization should go into CodeGen? I am not really familiar with stuff that happens after the MidLevel. Cheers, Michael Am 13.09.2017 um 19:21 schrieb Craig Topper: >...

...uld perform this in DAGCombiner and remove the various target specific combines that we still have. At least ARM/AARCH64 and X86 have cases that can hopefully be generalised and removed, but there will probably be a few legality/perf issues that will occur. Simon. > On 14 Sep 2017, at 06:23, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > > Probably in visitMUL in DAGCombiner.cpp to be target independent. Or in LowerMUL in X86ISelLowering.cpp to be X86 specific. > > Adding Simon. Simon, which were you thinking? > > ~Craig > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:06...

I am ''raking'' my brain to fix this problem - I have searched, googled, looked through rake documentation, wiki.rubyonrails and I can''t fix... This works $ rake plugindoc (in /home/craig/ruby-db/th-db) rdoc -o doc/plugins/ez_where --title ''Ez Where Plugin Documentation'' -- line-numbers --inline-source -T html vendor/plugins/ez_where/lib/caboose/clause.rb vendor/plugins/ez_where/lib/caboose/condition.rb vendor/plugins/ez_where/lib/caboose/ez.rb vendor/plugins/ez_wh...

...remove the various target specific combines that we still have. > > At least ARM/AARCH64 and X86 have cases that can hopefully be > generalised and removed, but there will probably be a few legality/perf > issues that will occur. > > Simon. > >> On 14 Sep 2017, at 06:23, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com<mailto:craig.topper at gmail.com> >> <mailto:craig.topper at gmail.com<mailto:craig.topper at gmail.com>>> wrote: >> >> Probably in visitMUL in DAGCombiner.cpp to be target independent. Or >> in LowerMUL in X86ISelLow...

...ve the various target specific combines that we still have. > > At least ARM/AARCH64 and X86 have cases that can hopefully be > generalised and removed, but there will probably be a few legality/perf > issues that will occur. > > Simon. > >> On 14 Sep 2017, at 06:23, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com >> <mailto:craig.topper at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Probably in visitMUL in DAGCombiner.cpp to be target independent. Or >> in LowerMUL in X86ISelLowering.cpp to be X86 specific. >> >> Adding Simon. Simon, which wer...

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > virtual bar *foo() = 0; > > where foo() also exists as pure in the base class. Clang-modernize has a > FIXME that says it can't find the "=0" to do the insert of override. > Does that mean we have a pure virtual functi...

...oth EVEX/EVEX_4V and TA. So, i restored my original instructions and for that i have to include bool HasTA = TSFlags & X86II::TA; in x86MCCodeEmitter.cpp then used this condition; if(HasTA) ++SrcRegNum; in order to emit binary correctly. Is it right? On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > Put the TA's back. EVEX/EVEX_4V does not replace TA. They are for > different things. An EVEX/EVEX_4V instruction must use one of T8, TA, XOP8, > XOP9, XOPA. > > ~Craig > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 5:33 PM, hameeza ahmed <...

I''ve seen that Rails 1.1 is not reliable with Ruby 1.8.2 so you should upgrade to 1.8.4 I''m running ruby 1.8.3. What''s the story with it? Do I need to upgrade before I try Rails 1.1? Thanks Greg -- Greg Freemyer The Norcross Group Forensics for the 21st Century

Thank You, I changed TA to EVEX or EVEX_4V. But now i am getting following error: Invalid prefix! UNREACHABLE executed at /lib/Target/X86/MCTargetDesc/X86MCCodeEmitter.cpp:647! On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 4:36 AM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > Not all instructions can use EVEX_4V. Move instructions in particular > cannot because they don't have 2 sources. > > What do you intend to do with the binary output once you have it? You > don't seem to be targeting a partic...

System: I am running RedHat 8.0 (2.4.18-14smp) with SAMBA 2.7 and user authentication against OpenLDAP 2.1.22. Problem: On RedHat, Put over (I think 70 or so) users within a secondary group. Got to Konqueror or Nautilus and try to change a directory's permissions to that group with over 70 or so users in it, (it may be 80 or 90 users), YOU CAN NOT assign that group to have ownership of that

+Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> +tstellar at redhat.com <tstellar at redhat.com> for release thoughts.... On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:03 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > As far as I could tell, the only non-Intel contributions were from > mechanical API updates or fixing include paths when files moved to other > libraries for layering. > > I'm happy to do it on whatever side of the branch people...

...controller that will be using it. I have tried putting the sections labeled #1 & #2 both in application.rb and in my specific controller but that doesn''t seem to satisfy the ''localize'' thing. Evidently, I am missing something of significance...clues anyone? Thanks Craig

...:RecognizableInstr::emitInstructionSpecifier(): Assertion `numPhysicalOperands >= 2 + additionalOperands && numPhysicalOperands <= 4 + additionalOperands && "Unexpected number of operands for MRMSrcMemFrm"' failed What to do now? On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > VEX_4V tells the encoder to use the VEX.vvvv field to encode one of the > operands. Without it the encoder assumes that the destination and one of > the sources must be the same physical register. > > TA indicates which of the opcode...

Yep. Makes sense to me. There's nothing to simplify or constant-fold about an alloca. -Hal On 04/12/2017 04:23 PM, Craig Topper wrote: > Ping > > ~Craig > > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com > <mailto:craig.topper at gmail.com>> wrote: > > I notice that GetUnderlyingObject has a few checks, but alloca > isn't one of them. Then i...

...n my shares with the command: setfacl -m g:domain_admins:rwx /data/shares/admin, it just results in error. I've tried running the command wbinfo on both the file server and domain controller and I get different results. >From the member/file server: [root at hnpmb01 ~]# wbinfo -i craig failed to call wbcGetpwnam: WBC_ERR_DOMAIN_NOT_FOUND Could not get info for user craig >From the domain controller: [root at hnpmb02 ~]# wbinfo -i craig craig:*:3000047:100:Craig Shone:/home/HN/craig:/bin/false It's almost as if setfacl cannot see the list of AD groups and acc...

Hi, I''m just learning Ruby on Rails and ran into something where I know I''m either doing something very stupid or I''m missing something. My model as a boolean attribute called active_flag. In my Sql Server database this is stored as a bit value. I then setup a method in my controller called "deactivate". This is very simple, it does: def deactivate

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > It also doesn't do pure methods either. I think I don't quite understand what that means. Can you give me an example? > On Thursday, March 6, 2014, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > >> After running the tool...

...y make that much harder (if at all) given that they'd need to clean up the build as well. Are there any other (non-Intel) devs who contributed significantly or might have specific opinions about this? Does it make more sense to this before or after the branch? On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:25 PM Craig Topper via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Patches up > > Clang: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56690 > LLVM: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56691 > > ~Craig > > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 3:51 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> > wrote: >...

I don't ever do this... Shouldn't this be enough to set up a virtual server in apache? I did create an entry in /etc/hosts and in dns for this fqdn it still gives me the contents of /var/www/html and not /home/craig/ruby-db/th-db/public <VirtualHost *> DocumentRoot "/home/craig/ruby-db/th-db/public" ServerName app-server.tobyhouse.com <Directory "/home/craig/ruby-db/th-db/public"> allow from all Options Indexes ExecCGI FollowSymLinks ReWriteEngine On </Di...