search for: mganin

On 30 April 2010 11:43, Sherief N. Farouk <sherief at mganin.com> wrote: >>> I'm a software engineer. I'm terribly uncomfortable with C. > > Aaaaahahahahahahahaha Please be civil, guys. Different engineers have different skill levels, so what. If someone asks for some help with the reference implementation the least we can do is po...

I'm a software engineer. I'm terribly uncomfortable with C. I want someone to show me a simplified use of Speex decoding. FWIW I'm finally getting my head around the API but the example had me a little lost with its cryptic variable names and monolithic nature. The example I'm asking for is way simpler than the final code I will ship to production so in essence, I'm looking for

I'm trying to build the sources from the svn trunk using VC2008, and I'm running into some problems. First, I have no idea what the configure project is for, and it fails with a manifest related error (the project lacks any .c* files anyway). This causes an avalanche of problems, initiated by TableGen not being able to build. Has anyone been successful in getting the LLVM libs to build

Building 2.5 with VS2008, I noticed that the generated libraries for both debug and release builds share the same name - making them troublesome to merge into a unified 'lib'-like directory. Would a boost-like naming scheme be considered? - Sherief -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

> My goal is to avoid waiting several minutes on application startup > until > optimization and native codegen ends. No suspending/restarting, just > compiling, saving native generated code, and loading on future sessions, > more akin a conventional compiler. > I'm interested in something like that. I have a case (which seems similar to one experienced by Nick Capens) where

Just to be clear, nothing in the MS TCRs require that you use a certain compiler - it does, however, require that you link with the 360-specific C runtime libraries. That being said, I still believe that direct binary generation is not a feasible option, and the ObjC => C route is preferred. Kevin, hate to be asking this but do you have access to the XDK or are you just "aiming" for

From: Sherief Farouk [mailto:sherief.farouk at twisted-works.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 5:34 PM To: 'speex-dev at xiph.org' Subject: Handling allocation failure in resampler init - patch Hi, Here's a patch that stops allocation failures during resampler init from segfaulting, now they fail gracefully and report the error through the error code parameter

> hton and ntoh intrinsics. These are needed to allow target code to > deal with endianness in a target independent way. (Ok, you could > potentially write code that detected endiannes at runtime and chose > multiversioned code based on that, but that is ugly and optimization > prohibiting). > Why not add types with explicit endianess? A trick I use for reading binary files

> I could add that to my CMake build system TODO, but so far I'm a bit > skeptic about LLVM relevance on the non-Unix world. The Windows build > can be broken for a long period before anyone notices. The VS2003 > support is broken since a long time ago and, apart from myself, no > other > user cares. Seems that LLVM penetration on Windows, for instance, is > almost nil. Is

How much latency are we talking about? It seems that this issue cannot be easily pinpointed, but if it turns out to be related to the Speex Resampler let me know and I will put it on my task list. - Sherief -----Original Message----- From: speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org] On Behalf Of Colin Guthrie Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:47 AM To: speex-dev at

If you can produce a simple minimal repro that exhibits this issue on some procedural signal (sine wave, etc) I'd love to look into it some more - I'm maintaining a hardened version of the Speex Resampler and would be very concerned if this bug made it into production. - Sherief -----Original Message----- From: speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:speex-dev-bounces at xiph.org] On

I'm slightly confused here, just to be clear: you're planning to go ObjC -> LLVM (via Clang or whatever) -> C, then use the 360 SDK compiler to build that, right? If that's the case, I think it'd be a better option than to use LLVM to directly generate XEXs, and you won't give the TCR guys fits (I checked the BAS TCRs, none of them say you can't do that, but the

Why? I think the discussion belongs here, and the topic doesn't seem to include proprietary information - a lot of 360 info has been made public through MS material. Other info can be discussed without much disclosure (we can refer to TCRs by three-letter category and number, etc). - Sherief On May 27, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Alex Rosenberg wrote: > Please create a thread on DevNet to discuss

Kevin, there're some unwritten rules on the 360 that seem to interfere with code generation - pointer load-stores seem to require zeroing the most significant 32 bits, for example - that was one issue that I ran into a while ago while fooling around with code generation on the 360 (and don't blame me if I'm slightly off the mark, it was quite a while ago). I didn't seem to find it