search for: fronends

Is there some simple textual frontend to the ManageSieve protocol somewhat easier to use than gnutls-cli? I.e. something to use like managesieve -u ef putscript myscript < /tmp/myscript Password: managesieve -u ef setactive myscript Password: simply doing the TLS authentication and length computation for me.

Hi, Is there any php or other web (not cli) front end (same as omega) for Xapian index? I would like to use Xapian for an intranet search portal, and modify the style of it. Many thanks, Omer

Thanks Chris. I'll follow any ongoing discussion about this. Unless I'm missing something, customizable widths for integer types is necessary to achieve source-level compatibility with existing cross-compilers. It would be great to see the fronend being parameterized by integer widths at runtime. There would be no noticable loss of efficiency and this would avoid the obnoxious and

On Jul 1, 2008, at 9:45 PM, John Regehr wrote: > Thanks Chris. I'll follow any ongoing discussion about this. > Unless I'm > missing something, customizable widths for integer types is > necessary to > achieve source-level compatibility with existing cross-compilers. > > It would be great to see the fronend being parameterized by integer > widths > at

Talin schrieb: > Well, the fact that union members have to be indexed by number means > that the ordering has to be part of the type - so even though > type-theoretically union { i32, float } is the same as union { float, > i32 }, in my implementation they are distinct types. However, from the > standpoint of a frontend, this is not a great concern, because the > frontend

Hello. How are the things going with the llvm-gcc for SPARC and Solaris OS? I have discovered recently the fact, that the code is still in the "patches welcome" stage and is far even from being successfully built on SPARC. I would like to know, if anyone maintaining this code, what is the current to-do list, etc. I would like to offer my help for gcc front-end on SPARC project. --

Although the process of porting the LLVM backend to a new architecture looks pretty straightforward (and is very well documented) there's a frontend issue that I'm not clear on: How do we to tell the frontend about implementation-defined constants like integer width? In other words, when llvm-gcc does a promote-to-integer operation, this acts differently if the target architecture

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, John Regehr wrote: > Although the process of porting the LLVM backend to a new architecture > looks pretty straightforward (and is very well documented) there's a > frontend issue that I'm not clear on: > > How do we to tell the frontend about implementation-defined constants > like integer width? In other words, when llvm-gcc does a >

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:25 PM, me22 <me22.ca at gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/1/14 Talin <viridia at gmail.com>: > > The reason for doing it this way is that to construct a union, you really > > need 4 pieces of information: The type of the union, the type and value > of > > the member to be initialized, and the index of which member is being > >

2010/1/14 Talin <viridia at gmail.com>: > The reason for doing it this way is that to construct a union, you really > need 4 pieces of information: The type of the union, the type and value of > the member to be initialized, and the index of which member is being > initialized. Does requiring the index mean that uniquing the union type will have to re-write many of the

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Joachim Durchholz <jo at durchholz.org>wrote: > Talin schrieb: > > Well, the fact that union members have to be indexed by number means that >> the ordering has to be part of the type - so even though type-theoretically >> union { i32, float } is the same as union { float, i32 }, in my >> implementation they are distinct types.

Hi all, I have started stubdom, thank all of you. But I still met a problem, that is I found stubdom block when it run 107s. the message in "xm li" : Domain-0 0 1719 2 r----- 171.9 hvmachine 1 256 1 -b---- 110.6 hvmachine-dm