search for: handlesubstitut

...================================= > > My experiment to build as if Linux has failed: > > gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/home/llvm/obj/tools/llvmc' > Compiling ConfigLexer.cpp > /usr/home/llvm/obj/../tools/llvmc/ConfigLexer.l: In function ` > llvm::ConfigLexerTokens handleSubstitution(llvm::ConfigLexerTokens)': > /usr/home/llvm/obj/../tools/llvmc/ConfigLexer.l:66: error: `assert' undeclared > (first use this function) > /usr/home/llvm/obj/../tools/llvmc/ConfigLexer.l:66: error: (Each undeclared > identifier is reported only once for each function i...

Reid, >As for Interix support in general, I'm having a hard time determining >which variant of Unix Interix implements. It seems to be partially Posix >1 and partially Posix 2 based. Do you have any further information >related to the specific standards supported by Interix? I don't want to >incorrectly categorize the Interix support. I've discussed this subject with

Jeff/Vladimir: As with Interix, I've recently added support for FreeBSD into lib/System. Currently, the implementation of FreeBSD just uses the "generic Unix" implementation which probably should work on FreeBSD. If not, I would appreciate it if you could make patches in the FreeBSD directory. If you do, don't forget that you need to remove anything that doesn't work in the

Here is the bulk of the sanitizing. My residual doubts center around the question whether we still do/want to support (un)compressed *byte*code in 2.0/2.1. I need a definitive word on this to proceed. My understanding is that bytecode is already gone, but there are still some functions/enums that really deal with *byte*code (instead of *bit*code). I did not touch those areas, so the attached