search for: emphat

moronic monday (pst) question time. this may have been covered elsewhere, and emphatically shot down (and if so, I apologize), but I'm interested in using ssh-agent to decrypt data. ssh certificates are the most secure user auth token we have, and even though ssh certs aren't chainable, we routinely use them to assert identity to things other than ssh (eg. if you can prese...

...cal in Active directory domains - from past practices. And, even now, they are somewhat equivocal in saying it shouldn't be used. [No source given, but it's something I've looked at in the last year and there are places they say "DON'T" and other where it's *far* less emphatic, almost permissive.] I'm not going to take a personal stance - other than to say that using .local is probably going to get more complicated as time goes on, and might be the source of some grief. Unfortunately, AFAICT, there's no real great alternative to a non-internet first level doma...

...o coxph. > Is is somewhat sensible to use cox.zph() to investigate which variables need time interaction... The cox.zph function is primarily graphical; I would respond to your question with "is it good to look at scatterplots before fitting a linear model?" My answer to this is emphatically yes. Terry Therneau

...gh, less verbose, and easier > to maintain. I'm not claiming to be the biggest fan of some features in > GoogleMock, but on the whole, I think it's better than the alternative and > will allow more careful testing of C++ APIs where the interesting part is > the API itself. > Emphatic +1 One of the major problems with unit testing (in general and in LLVM in particular) is that it's difficult to isolate coupled components from each other. A good mocking framework makes this much easier and thus can help us create more unit tests in the long run. GoogleMock is popular, batt...

...is often unclear. I'm not opposed, > but I'm also not signing up to help. :) > While I'm also not in a position to help a lot, I think there is a question we should ask here: Should we hold new code to this standard? Should we declare that this is what we want? For me, I say emphatically "yes" and we should put it into the coding standards. I think cleaning up the existing code is a good thing to do and we can let people who have a reason actually drive that, but I don't want that to be necessarily finished in order for us to establish reasonable guidelines goin...

...r %x, i32 1 > > Ditto for all other instructions that care about pointee types, like load and store: > %v = load i32, ptr %p ; loads already know (and store!) their loaded type internally > store i32 %v, ptr %p ; no need to duplicate that %p points to, we have the type on %v > > Emphatically agree. No instruction should really change semantics here. GEPs should keep working the exact same way, the type involved should just be separate from the pointer's type. > > > I don't think this can be incremental, I think it all goes at once. > > I have some ideas...

I have some concrete use cases in testing the pass manager where it will allow the tests of this API to be more thorough, less verbose, and easier to maintain. I'm not claiming to be the biggest fan of some features in GoogleMock, but on the whole, I think it's better than the alternative and will allow more careful testing of C++ APIs where the interesting part is the API itself.

I think we should keep GEP essentially the same, but disassociate the type being GEPd over from the type of the operands. So, assuming the new ptr type is spelled "ptr", we could use this syntax: %inner.ptr = getelementptr ptr, ptr %x, i32 1 Or if I was adding 1 to a "struct A*" value in C: %next_elt = getelementptr %struct.A, ptr %x, i32 1 Ditto for all other instructions

...> but I'm also not signing up to help. :) >> > > While I'm also not in a position to help a lot, I think there is a > question we should ask here: > > Should we hold new code to this standard? Should we declare that this is > what we want? > > For me, I say emphatically "yes" and we should put it into the coding > standards. I think cleaning up the existing code is a good thing to do and > we can let people who have a reason actually drive that, but I don't want > that to be necessarily finished in order for us to establish reasonable...

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:34 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Akemi Yagi wrote: >> To add to your fun, let me present my wish list: >> >> mplayer-gui and libquicktime (latest version from PUIAS) and >> mlt >= 0.9.4 >> > Ummm, NO. NOT the latter, under any circumstance... or hadn't you missed > the huge announcements that Apple would no longer

> I verified the Wiki doc and here it works like described (without > setting a filter). I did exactly what is described in the Wiki. To > verify, I added a regular domain user to the domain group I set in the > GPO, and after I log in as this user on a domain member, this account > had local admin permissions. > > Doesn't this work in your installation? What happens

Hi, In Base R Stats Package, the quantile function has 9 Type's: ?quantile I'd be very grateful if simple numerical examples (ideally from members of the R core team), for each of the 9 methods, both for EVEN and ODD numbered length's of series, be provided. thanks, Amarjit [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

.... > however, i'm not sure whether the benefit justifies the complexity, > so this feature could be removed from future OpenSSH versions. Please do not remove this feature. On many of the systems I have to access, I am in that exact same situation--my home directory is on NFS, and I most emphatically DO NOT want my X11 cookies stored there. Not only does doing so cause my cookies to cross the wire unecrypted, but if I then su, I can't access the cookies without special pains (because the NFS servers in question all map the client's root to anonymous). In fact, one of the (many) r...

Hi, Is it possible to design an IVR using SER ? If yes please advice. thanks arun -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20070419/d533051e/attachment.htm

...>> to maintain. I'm not claiming to be the biggest fan of some features in >> GoogleMock, but on the whole, I think it's better than the alternative and >> will allow more careful testing of C++ APIs where the interesting part is >> the API itself. >> > > Emphatic +1 > > One of the major problems with unit testing (in general and in LLVM in > particular) is that it's difficult to isolate coupled components from each > other. A good mocking framework makes this much easier and thus can help us > create more unit tests in the long run. Goo...

...reading this will recognize that alpha=-1 is the so-called "law of the wall" for the decay of turbulence away from a frictional wall.) Thus, my approach is to try to fit a line like log(Y/Ly) ~ log(X/Lx) but since there are errors in (X,Y,Lx,Ly) (all of which rely on measurement), we emphatically have errors in both the dependent and independent variable. If our scaling is correct, X/Lx and Y/Ly are roughly of order unity. The data suggest log(X/Lx) and log(Y/Ly) have roughly comparable scatter. Thus, I'd be happy to state that the errors in the dependent and independent variab...

Hai,   I was just reading : https://www.howtoforge.com/tutorial/ata-over-ethernet-aoe-on-debian-8-jessie/   I was wondering, anyone tried AoE for sysvol, so i dont needs replication anymore. Anyone Pro’s and Con’s ?    Or can anyone tell of sysvol is going to be replicated by samba so we dont need scripts anymore.     Greetz,   Louis

...any bitstream changes introduced going forward. Right now, we have a strong need to recruit volunteers to help with the codec maintenance side of things. So in answer to your question -- "Do you need someone to maintain these branches and the VC++ and CW projects?" -- the answer is an emphatic, yes! Personally I am in violent agreement with your point that there needs to be a connect-the-dots between both MAC and Windows toolsets to the final OGG/Vorbis/Theora bitstream. Monty & I have discussed this, and I think we're on the same page. The only problem is that there are so...

Hello, I was discussing on the mplayer/mencoder ML about transcodingfrom Divx to Theora. I got these kind of answers: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder.user/280 Of course I understoud only 50% of what he said, as well as I am not really used with codec and video glossary... But I generally understoud his opinion. What to think? I would like not to believe him, espacially when

I am setting to a shorewall system with 4 NIC''s as per the outline specification below. Can anyone please have a look and let me know what I have missed and what I have got wrong as I want to take this system live ASAP but do not want to kill internet access and the hosting for too long ! I have listed below the system outline & have attached the config files that I have changed, if