Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "destroy_fil".
Did you mean:
destroy_file
2004 Sep 24
0
[LLVMdev] Little win32/Signals.cpp patch
Actually, <algorithm> is not correct. This remove is in stdio.h and
io.h in VC7.1. It removes a file, not elements from a collection.
The proper solution is to not use remove at all and use
Path::destroy_file().
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:09:37 -0700
Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> wrote:
> <algorithm> works too.
>
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:09:21 -0500
> Alkis Evlogimenos <alkis at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 09:43, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:...
2004 Sep 24
1
[LLVMdev] Little win32/Signals.cpp patch
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 08:17:41AM -0700, Jeff Cohen wrote:
> Actually, <algorithm> is not correct. This remove is in stdio.h and
> io.h in VC7.1. It removes a file, not elements from a collection.
>
> The proper solution is to not use remove at all and use
> Path::destroy_file().
But don't you want to use ::remove instead of std::remove then?
--
Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
2004 Sep 24
1
[LLVMdev] Little win32/Signals.cpp patch
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 08:17, Jeff Cohen wrote:
> Actually, <algorithm> is not correct. This remove is in stdio.h and
> io.h in VC7.1. It removes a file, not elements from a collection.
>
> The proper solution is to not use remove at all and use
> Path::destroy_file().
Yes.
I'm currently working on "Block", "File" and "MappedFile" abstractions
for lib/System. When done, these abstractions will take care of the
bulks of the remaining system dependent behavior in LLVM. Unfortunately,
the conversion from the XPS code is somewh...
2004 Sep 24
6
[LLVMdev] Little win32/Signals.cpp patch
<algorithm> works too.
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:09:21 -0500
Alkis Evlogimenos <alkis at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 09:43, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> > Jeff Cohen wrote:
> >
> > >But I compiled that under vc7.1 as it was!
> > >
> > >
> > ;-((
> >
> > Probably is an implicid includes, but I'm using the
2008 Sep 25
1
Will acts_as_paranoid work with attachment_fu?
I''ve got a problem in that users are deleting a paranoid model through
the application, including dependents. Some of these dependents are
paranoid too, but not the attachments. (I''m using DB file storage.) I
need to be able to un-delete these things and I''m now wondering if
acts_as_paranoid will work with models that use attachment_fu? If so, in
what model to I add the
2004 Sep 24
1
[LLVMdev] Little win32/Signals.cpp patch
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 05:32:08PM +0200, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> Jeff Cohen wrote:
>
> ><algorithm> works too.
> >
> >
> For std::remove yes... but...
>
> d:\home\arathorn\sandbox\llvm\llvm\lib\System\platform\Signals.cpp(179)
> : error C2065: 'stderr' : undeclared identifier
>