search for: destructive

I'd like to know if there's a way to non-destructively reverse L-R channels in an ogg vorbis file? I've been recording live classical sources, but until tonight haven't listened to them on anything with even approaching decent stereo separation. Well, you guessed it. Why the hell are the violins on the right and the brass on the left? Che...

...mes(x) # NULL where 'names<-' has a functional flavour (does not change x), but: x = 1:2 names(x) # NULL 'names<-'(x, 'foo') # c(foo=1, 2) names(x) # "foo" NA where 'names<-' seems to perform a side effect on x (destructively modifies x). furthermore: x = c(foo=1) names(x) # "foo" 'names<-'(x, NULL) names(x) # NULL 'names<-'(x, 'bar') names(x) # "bar" !!! x = c(foo=1) names(x) # "foo" 'names<-'...

Hi Ted, Doug said you might have a clang-based checker that would detect when people allocate memory with a BumpPtrAllocator and then construct a class into it that needs destruction. In killing valgrind-found memory leaks in LLVM, I've found several instances of this mistake. They often involve SmallVectors, which only show up as leaks in valgrind if they happen to overflow their static

I know that you should always use a POST to perform actions that are destructive. I intend to break this rule and use a GET, but before I do, I''d like to know if there is a better way of doing this:- I have an account edit form for the user to make changes to their profile. They have to be logged-in to do this. The problem is I have a file_column field within the f...

Hello, For performance reasons, I would like to provide a way to skip construction/destruction of objects that are stack allocated. Typically, C-style arrays of std::complex create an initialization loops that is almost always unnecessary. I am thinking of providing an __attribute__((uninitialized)) that can be applied to an object declaration: { std::complex<float> foo[64][64]

When implementing EVT_PAINT handlers in c++ the PaintDC object is constructed at the beginning of the function, and auto destructed at it''s end, which informs wxwidgets that "invalid regions in the window have been repainted". Under ruby, this is not the case and causes a stream of EVT_PAINT events to be sent to the given window (until one of PaintDC objects is destructed by

. Monday, July 5, 2004 15:50:06 (-08:00hrs UTC) Hello asterisk-users, From the following post: On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Joe Baptista wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Randy Bush wrote: >> i did not criticize the protocol. remember, my question started >> with >> >> >> i am looking at iax to

Hello!. How can i use @releaseDomain from dom0 to subscribe for domain destruction? I''m try to add watch for @releaseDomain path with token equal of needed domain id. But when another domain dies, i get domain that i provide via token to xs_watch. Is that possible to get id of domain what released from xenstore? -- Vasiliy Tolstov, Clodo.ru e-mail: v.tolstov@selfip.ru jabber:

...registry(regedit etc..) so you can read the entries your PDC will not work. What's not exactly clear is if any of the tools like net rcp vampire or getsid tools change the operation of the PDC in this way or any other way for that mater. The net rcp tools don't access the registry in this destructive way do they? Like: # net rpc vampire -S TRANSGRESSION -U Administrator%not24get > /tmp/vampire.log 2>1 Is it safe to run the net rpc vampire command on a PDC as many times as you want in effort to test the NT4 -> samba PDC? While keeping the NT4 PDC in production mode? With the goal of t...

...d the entries your PDC will not work. > > What's not exactly clear is if any of the tools like net rcp vampire > or > getsid tools change the operation of the PDC in this way or any other > way > for that mater. The net rcp tools don't access the registry in this > destructive way do they? > Like: > # net rpc vampire -S TRANSGRESSION -U Administrator%not24get > > /tmp/vampire.log 2>1 > > Is it safe to run the net rpc vampire command on a PDC as many times > as you > want in effort to test the NT4 -> samba PDC? While keeping the NT4 &gt...

Hi, we're using Asterisk 1.6.1.1. We've got a problem during a transfer call concerning the destroying of the unused channel. At the beginning we have a call A -> B (A and B being two user). With the AMI interface we ask the redirection of: - case 1: the caller (user A) - case 2: the called (user B) to the extension C (not a user but a simple "Park()" dialplan application).

Hello, I got situation which is unclear for me, hope somebody could explain this. A calls to B INVITE sent from A to B B responds with 100 Trying B responds with 183 Progress After 10 seconds: Asterisk CLI: Scheduling destruction of SIP dialog '..' in 32000 ms (Method: INVITE) Asterisk sends CANCEL _instantly_ B responds with 200 OK and 487 Request Terminated Asterisk confirms 102 ACK

Hi all, I'd like to verify whether an Asterisk behaviour is expected or not, and ask for advice for the best solution. I have Asterisk 1.8.17.0 on debian wheezy, listening on UDP and TCP 5060, and TLS 5061. Asterisk is part of a dispatcher set in Kamailio (4.1.3), and is marked as AP (Active Probing): this means that Kamailio sends an OPTIONS request every N seconds to verify Asterisk is

Having read through the proposal, I feel like I missing some of the background to understand the problem you're trying to solve. My mental model is that construction of an object creates a new abstract location in an infinite heap with each object infinitely far apart. Destruction of the object destroys the abstract location. As a result, destructing one object and constructing another

I'm curious about the design rationale for how ManagedStatic instances are cleaned up, and I'm hoping someone can shed some light on it. Currently, ManagedStatic objects are cleaned up when llvm_shutdown() traverses the global list of initialized objects and calls destroy() on each. This leads to two questions: 1. An assertion enforces that the objects are deleted in reverse order of

On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Having read through the proposal, I feel like I missing some of the > background to understand the problem you're trying to solve. > > My mental model is that construction of an object creates a new abstract > location in an infinite heap with each object infinitely far apart. >

Right, I'm suggesting we keep llvm_shutdown() for users who want this control, but also destroy still-live ManagedStatic instances if llvm_shutdown() is not called. This helps in the case where there is not a clear time when llvm_shutdown() can be called, especially given that LLVM cannot be resurrected in the same process due to current limitations in the pass registry, and perhaps

Hey all, Quick question about handling completed workers... Most of my workers are one-offs that just let me spin off a long-running file transfer process and then they just need to self-destruct when completed. Thus, at the end of my do_work, I just call self.delete to (in theory) self-destruct. However, while checking the jobs.size from the console, I''ve noticed that this

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /><style type="text/css"><!-- #msg dl { border: 1px #006 solid; background: #369; padding:

This patch adds 'module' member in the 'struct vsock_transport' in order to get/put the transport module. This prevents the module unloading while sockets are assigned to it. We increase the module refcnt when a socket is assigned to a transport, and we decrease the module refcnt when the socket is destructed. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com>