Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "fancyness".
Did you mean:
fanciness
2011 Jan 05
2
[LLVMdev] Fw: include/Config/config.h discrepancies between CMake and autofoo builds
Whoops, phone rang and I forgot to cc to the list before I typed the message.
----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>
> To: Ruben Van Boxem <vanboxem.ruben at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wed, January 5, 2011 3:38:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] include/Config/config.h discrepancies between CMake and
>autofoo builds
>
>
>
>
2011 Jan 08
1
Synchronizing a streaming client to the server Was: Idea to possibly improve flac?
On Jan 7, 2011, at 16:48, Ben Allison wrote:
> The issue is that silent frames compress to a very small size, and
> the Ogg
> packeting layer can put more than one FLAC frame into a page. So
> if you
> have an extended period of silence with a live or rate-limited input
> stream, the client buffers may exhaust themselves before a new page
> can be
> put together and
2011 Jan 05
4
[LLVMdev] include/Config/config.h discrepancies between CMake and autofoo builds
2011/1/5 Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es>:
> Ruben Van Boxem <vanboxem.ruben at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Yeah that's the two different ones I mean. Everything MS (intrinsics,
>> language features etc...) is purely version-bound, so I don't even get
>> why CMake insists on checking every known function prototype of for
>> example "recv"