search for: inextricably

...scripts. repositories like postgres, EPEL, etc won't work, either, as their C7 packaged daemons are all configured to use systemd. That?s just skimming the surface. The real hard bits come from the way systemd hooks into the whole FreeDesktop infrastructure and vice versa. (e.g. dbus is now inextricably part of systemd, and many FreeDesktop interactions happen via dbus.) This is why the BSDs are either dropping GNOME and KDE (e.g. Lumina in TrueOS) or have badly lagging ports compared to the upstream version. I suspect it?s probably easier to start with C6, then backport as much as is possible w...

...nerate different IR for every platform. It's done by the front-end. There are a variety of attributes and mechanisms which are used to convolute data and marshall it through call sites in an ABI-conformant manner. > I want llvm to do the specialization, because specialization is > inextricably tied to similar optimizations, like inlining and > partial evaluation. Doing it within llvm has many advantages, such > as JIT support and link-time optimization. These are IR-level optimizations, which LLVM does not magically do of its own accord. If LLVM transparently performs speci...

...ou clearly have strong ideas about how type > specialization should be implemented; why do you think having LLVM > make the decision for you internally would be better than making the > decision yourself, as you can do today? I want llvm to do the specialization, because specialization is inextricably tied to similar optimizations, like inlining and partial evaluation. Doing it within llvm has many advantages, such as JIT support and link-time optimization. Moreover, specialization should really be done at the codegen level in order to do it properly. C++ templates are a great example of why...

...ork, either, as their C7 packaged daemons are all >>> configured to use systemd. >> That?s just skimming the surface. >> >> The real hard bits come from the way systemd hooks into the whole >> FreeDesktop infrastructure and vice versa. (e.g. dbus is now >> inextricably part of systemd, and many FreeDesktop interactions happen >> via dbus.) This is why the BSDs are either dropping GNOME and KDE >> (e.g. Lumina in TrueOS) or have badly lagging ports compared to the >> upstream version. >> >> I suspect it?s probably easier to start...

...ange depending on the type? I would assume that attributes like "ccc" are type-invariant; i.e. every instantiation should use the C-calling convention, whatever that happens to be for the types in question. >> I want llvm to do the specialization, because specialization is >> inextricably tied to similar optimizations, like inlining and >> partial evaluation. Doing it within llvm has many advantages, such >> as JIT support and link-time optimization. > > These are IR-level optimizations, which LLVM does not magically do of > its own accord. If LLVM transparentl...

...ouble is you can't simply copy that IR while inlining and expect things to still work, because the operation of Unwind_Resume depends on what stack frame it's in. I don't agree that the inlined version is correct IR. The 'invoke semantics' you're talking about are inextricably intertwined with _Unwind_Resume's semantics. > However if you add a catch-all to the selector instead: > %eh_select8.i = tail call i32 (i8*, i8*, ...)* > @llvm.eh.selector.i32( i8* %eh_ptr.i, i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* > @__gxx_personality_v0 to i8*), i8* null) > then th...

...;t simply copy that IR while inlining and expect > things to still work, because the operation of Unwind_Resume depends > on what stack frame it's in. I don't agree that the inlined version > is correct IR. The 'invoke semantics' you're talking about are > inextricably intertwined with _Unwind_Resume's semantics. The semantics of invoke are described in the LangRef. I took the approach of artificially obtaining these semantics, which have an impedance mismatch with the gcc unwinder, by playing with the way we set up the exception table. If you manage to ob...

...ositories like postgres, EPEL, etc won't work, either, as their C7 packaged daemons are all configured to use systemd. > That?s just skimming the surface. > > The real hard bits come from the way systemd hooks into the whole FreeDesktop infrastructure and vice versa. (e.g. dbus is now inextricably part of systemd, and many FreeDesktop interactions happen via dbus.) This is why the BSDs are either dropping GNOME and KDE (e.g. Lumina in TrueOS) or have badly lagging ports compared to the upstream version. > > I suspect it?s probably easier to start with C6, then backport as much as is p...

...packaged daemons are all >>>> configured to use systemd. >>> That?s just skimming the surface. >>> >>> The real hard bits come from the way systemd hooks into the whole >>> FreeDesktop infrastructure and vice versa. (e.g. dbus is now >>> inextricably part of systemd, and many FreeDesktop interactions >>> happen via dbus.) This is why the BSDs are either dropping GNOME >>> and KDE (e.g. Lumina in TrueOS) or have badly lagging ports compared >>> to the upstream version. >>> >>> I suspect it?s proba...

...t-end. > Do the attributes change depending on the type? You change the function signature depending whether the return type is a struct or not if you want C compatibility, if that is what you mean. > >> I want llvm to do the specialization, because specialization is > >> inextricably tied to similar optimizations, like inlining and > >> partial evaluation. Doing it within llvm has many advantages, such > >> as JIT support and link-time optimization. > > > > These are IR-level optimizations, which LLVM does not magically do of > > its own acc...

On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 11:23 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > If you want to create a CentOS-7 variant that does not use systemd, > then start a Special Interest Group and create modified packages > to use something else instead ......., much like the this group did > with Debian: > > https://devuan.org/ > > In the case of CentOS-7 .. you don't need to create a whole new

On 07/29/2015 07:40 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > >> Security is *always* opposed to convenience. > False. OS X by default runs only signed binaries, and if they come > from the App Store they run in a sandbox. User gains significant > security with this, and are completely unaware of it. There is

Hi Dale, > #include <cstdio> > class A { > public: > A() {} > ~A() {} > }; > void f() { > A a; > throw 5.0; > } > main() { > try { > f(); > } catch(...) { printf("caught\n"); } > } this example indeed shows the problem. Let me explain to see if we agree on what the problem is. Suppose we don't artificially

I started thinking about this after doing a little testing with AAC, MP3 and Ogg Vorbis. I was comparing the different formats at similiar bitrates. After a while I finally realized that they all sound more or less the same to me. >From 160 kbps on, I usually cannot detect any difference between a lossy encoding and the original source. If LAME is used, I have to strain to notice anything at

...IR while inlining and >> expect >> things to still work, because the operation of Unwind_Resume depends >> on what stack frame it's in. I don't agree that the inlined version >> is correct IR. The 'invoke semantics' you're talking about are >> inextricably intertwined with _Unwind_Resume's semantics. > > The semantics of invoke are described in the LangRef. I took the > approach of artificially obtaining these semantics, which have an > impedance mismatch with the gcc unwinder, by playing with the way we > set up the exception tab...

(Mail system seems to have eaten this, sorry if it's a repeat) On Dec 8, 2007, at 12:48 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Dale, > >> - Why was C++ claiming that every selector has a catch-all handler? > > this is easy: because the semantics of invoke require it. Yes, > really. > If unwinding reaches an invoke then control is required to jump to the > unwind basic

Is there any good free / accurate online resources with detailed country numbering plans? Failing that let's get something running ourselves. I was also thinking maybe people present could contribute some information on this list for now. The countries I am after are below. To start this off I will provide the information for Australia +61 and New Zealand +64. NZ Cellular: area code 21

Good morning (Pacific Time). I have a controller action that, as a side-effect, sends an email to an administrator. I want it to do something like this: specify "when someone successfully signs up, an email should be sent to the administrator with the person''s contact page" do post :signup, {...lots o'' params} response should_be success #

...of public safety answering points (PSAPs) are capable of receiving Phase I location information and 57 percent have implemented Wireless Phase II for at least one wireless carrier . As NENA i2 is essentially an expansion of the capabilities and concepts of Wireless Phase II, the adoption of i2 is inextricably linked to the deployment of Wireless Phase II. This linkage between i2 and Wireless Phase II is beneficial as vendors that have developed Wireless Phase II systems are more readily able to develop and market i2 systems. 1.6 NTWG Review of IP-to-IP Tandem Enablement Proposals On 19 July 2005 ESWG r...

...of public safety answering points (PSAPs) are capable of receiving Phase I location information and 57 percent have implemented Wireless Phase II for at least one wireless carrier . As NENA i2 is essentially an expansion of the capabilities and concepts of Wireless Phase II, the adoption of i2 is inextricably linked to the deployment of Wireless Phase II. This linkage between i2 and Wireless Phase II is beneficial as vendors that have developed Wireless Phase II systems are more readily able to develop and market i2 systems. 1.6 NTWG Review of IP-to-IP Tandem Enablement Proposals On 19 July 2005 ESWG r...