search for: lwg

...>> >> I recommend: >> >> MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI); >> >> -Howard > > "next" is a popular name; if it breaks llvm, I'd expect this standards change to break a lot of existing code. Do you really want to do that? I'm happy to open an LWG issue for you on this subject. Here are directions on submitting an issue: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#submit_issue Please don't hesitate to ask me if these directions aren't clear (I'll likely update the directions from your feedback). Here is a link...

...Hinnant wrote: > On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > >> "next" is a popular name; if it breaks llvm, I'd expect this standards change to break a lot of existing code. Do you really want to do that? >> > > I'm happy to open an LWG issue for you on this subject. Here are directions on submitting an issue: > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#submit_issue > It may be premature, but a resolution for the issue would be the same thing Boost does in this case: put the function in a subnames...

On Nov 14, 2009, at 3:16 PMPST, Howard Hinnant wrote: > In many places there is code that looks like: > > MBBI = next(MBBI); > > In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these > calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous: > llvm::next or std::next? > > I recommend: > > MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI); > > -Howard

In many places there is code that looks like: MBBI = next(MBBI); In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous: llvm::next or std::next? I recommend: MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI); -Howard

...uot; it means any pointer upon which > address computations and accesses to objects (that would be valid if the > pointer did point to the first element of such an array). Thus, nullptr is > valid if 'n' is zero. > > This was changed in DR2235: > http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2235 > The text and discussion of DR2235 sound like they intend to make the > behaviour of assign match that of the constructor that takes the same > arguments. What they actually did was change the constructor to match the > behaviour of assign, and it doesn't look...

Fellow R Users: I'm not extremely familiar with lda or R programming, but a recent editorial review of a manuscript submission has prompted a crash cousre. I am on this forum hoping I could solicit some much needed advice for deriving a classification equation. I have used three basic measurements in lda to predict two groups: male and female. I have a working model, low Wilk's lambda,

This weekend, I got an email from Nuno Lopes informing me that UBSAN now paid attention to attribute(nonnull), and he was having some problems with it going off when using libc++. I did some investigation, and found that he was exactly right - there were places (deep inside the vector code, for example) which called std::memcpy(null, null, 0) - which is definitely UB. In an ideal world, our C

...t;> MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI); >>> >>> -Howard >> >> "next" is a popular name; if it breaks llvm, I'd expect this >> standards change to break a lot of existing code. Do you really >> want to do that? > > I'm happy to open an LWG issue for you on this subject. Eek. I'm not sure I have enough background to be the driver on this; for example I didn't know what ADL was until I looked it up. That's why I phrased it as a question. At least you don't seem to think it's a dumb question:)

...;s car package. Is there some editing I can do to the list from bigglm that will allow utilization in epicalc, or some other technique? Thanks in advance. library(car) data(Mroz) Mroz$in.wf <- ifelse(Mroz$lfp == 'yes', 1 ,0) mod.bigglm <- bigglm(in.wf ~ k5 + k618 + age + wc + hc + lwg + inc ,data=Mroz ,family=binomial(link='logit') ) mod.glm <- glm(in.wf ~ k5 + k618 + age + wc + hc + lwg + inc ,data=Mroz ,family=binomial(link='logit') ) lroc(mod.glm) ## works, and generates the desired graph lroc(mod.bigglm) ## fails with message below Error...

...r control, I do not believe that we can provide a version of std::filesystem and promise future ABI stability at this time. > > More information: > > * The features for caching directory information were added late in the C++17 cycle, and there have been some concerns about them. > LWG issue #2708 (https://wg21.link/lwg2708 <https://wg21.link/lwg2708>) is one of them, and there are a couple of upcoming papers about the same part of the standard. > > * The clock stuff being added in C++20 has already been discussed here. > > > We can: > > 1) Not ship...

...E_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS=1, and it is indeed catching lots of errors! > (though it is safe for smallvector). DR 464 proposes a new data() method. I'd suggest implementing that in SmallVector, instead of relying on the relaxed checking in operator[](). http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#464 GNU libstdc++'s vector already has this data() method, but I suppose we can't rely on in it being in std::vector in general. > One minor thing is that StructType::get(NULL, 0) looks somewhat strange to > me.  How about adding a zero-argument version of "get&quo...

On May 27, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > On May 27, 2008, at 1:40 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >> >> From n2461: >> >>> 8 The insert members shall not affect the validity of iterators and >>> references to the container, and the erase members shall invalidate >>> only iterators and references to the erased elements. >> >> Pretty

On May 14, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > 2009/4/1 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: >> As far API design goes, we're in a mixed state. I'd strongly prefer >> to get rid of std::vector from the various interfaces, f.e. >> creating a >> constant array currently requires passing in an std::vector. For >> these sorts of interfaces, we

2009/4/1 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > As far API design goes, we're in a mixed state.  I'd strongly prefer > to get rid of std::vector from the various interfaces, f.e. creating a > constant array currently requires passing in an std::vector.  For > these sorts of interfaces, we should migrate to passing in a "Constant > *const* / unsigned" pair.

Hi All, I recently committed <filesystem> to trunk. I wanted to bring attention to some quirks it currently has. First, it's been put in a separate library, libc++fs, for now. Users are responsible for linking the library when they use filesystem. Second, it should still not be considered ABI stable. Vendors should be aware of this before shipping it. Hopefully all the standard and

...an ldap user account. I have found other posts to the list regarding this, but none of the have lead to a solution. Below you will find output (and some slapd logs) for the following commands: smbclient -L localhost -Uadministrator%not24get smbclient -L localhost pdbedit -Lwg net getlocalsid WASTE2 net group -l -Uadministrator%not24get -I192.168.0.220 net rpc group LIST global -Uadministrator%not24get -d 255 smbclient -L localhost -Uadministrator%not24get ----------------begin smbclient --------------------- session setup failed: NT_STATUS_LOG...

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:19 AM Christian Kühnel via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Louis, > > I think this is a good idea. We should start with some local experiments > where people are willing to try it and figure out how well that works and > what does not. Why not allow this for "not significant" changes? They are > merged without review

...R0Hf|tMJQNHB#3D^8_re?%hRxom43S+Z4fYZ}VpXzPR_hIk#RBnn6{|a( z9<23ZsdV+04;>N`6rov#<&ipXpuhhgKHVFrt at 667{E<>DC#ia at S{Ttg&EPIt?F|p* zs7`dih}b5c3gOdGFc?X(%9`>bBS<~3^arr&!bb1lFuxCrueNEtiYDmEm5sVma9ysK zZd8Zr5gq)(bkukQE=(_WNvSG1e%Ktj7kDB9_w))Q6f$bi5vh#L(Bq;J!chAoeM7wy zrlwg<FygPQmuA14GzG;qwgMK!X||`ah3OJ1Z8fJ0NrYXd3d at D+mO|@hZX4WV&Ph5t zE=`!wV;?rmbjbzj_^gUdLU;Ik7Qu~0)jJrD$V$_&D0&D_${uBH$Y(C+6v#E22pj$E zXqMdeJ=hj7#dax=y|z+)mS9YA<VI_VDTz>x{6<A6bv4J+=%P>YSf<64g(u!hn2aSc zid at v5#ICsG%cpyi3{|FCM|=fT%mDMq1(+V^`^yUCRQbIDjHM#oHv*e<1XB|Tlwp`...