search for: new_s

I''m trying to create a form/view that displays a mix of records that exist in the database and records that the user is working on but that don''t yet exist in the database. I want to leverage all of rails'' nice form helpers, especially the params hash that it generates for the records when the form is submitted. So - I am creating ''dummy'' records with

...llo, I think I have come across an inconsistency between gcc and clang/llvm with respect to returning small structs. Given the following code: > struct s { > int a; > int b; > }; > > struct s3 { > int a; > int b; > int c; > }; > > struct s new_s(int v){ > struct s res; > res.a = v; > res.b = -v; > return res; > } > > struct s3 new_s3(int v){ > struct s3 res; > res.a = v; > res.b = -v; > res.c = v<<2; > return res; > } For the function new_s() both the current...

Hi, I''m using the new nested forms functionality and I having problems with new created elements. I have an invoice with lines. I would like to be able to create a new invoice, in the same form insert new lines dinamically and saving the invoice and the lines when everything is validated, not before. The problem is that when I add a line dinamically to the form, the new line created

On 21/11/2015 00:05, Ming Lin wrote: > [ 1.752129] Freeing unused kernel memory: 420K (ffff880001b97000 - ffff880001c00000) > [ 1.986573] clocksource: tsc: mask: 0xffffffffffffffff max_cycles: 0x30e5c9bbf83, max_idle_ns: 440795378954 ns > [ 1.988187] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc > [ 3.235423] clocksource: timekeeping watchdog: Marking clocksource 'tsc'

Where is the code that maps the kernel of a DomU into memory? i.e, when you do a xm create <config file> what code is called to actually map the kernel into memory? Is it a python script or is it re-directed to Dom0 to do? Thanks. -Brian --------------------------------- Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.

Where is the code that maps the kernel of a DomU into memory? i.e, when you do a xm create <config file> what code is called to actually map the kernel into memory? Is it a python script or is it re-directed to Dom0 to do? Thanks. -Brian --------------------------------- Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.

What''s the best practice for naming keys in the params array so they map most efficiently to models? There isn''t an equivelent of ActiveRecord for mapping params keys to models, so I''m wondering if there is a best practice. I''m writing an addressbook with a form that has mixed models on it and multiple one-to-many relations. I''m processing new

Hi all, I''m happily using "HowToReuseEditViewsForNewViews" found at: http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pages/HowToReuseEditViewsForNewViews There''s this comment there saying you only need the tag "<%= auto_form %>" when using the code below. Can somebody tell me if that will work when extending it with model_name (some how)? I have several new_*

If I have a resource called ''assets'' then I get for free a bunch of helpers, like assets_path new_asset_path and so forth, right? I would like to be able to create a call to one of these on the fly when I only find out the name of the resource at run time. For example I would like to do this: resource_name = "assets" resource_path(resource_name, method => :new)

On 20/11/2015 09:11, Ming Lin wrote: > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 11:37 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> On 18/11/2015 06:47, Ming Lin wrote: >>> @@ -726,7 +798,11 @@ static void nvme_process_db(NvmeCtrl *n, hwaddr addr, int val) >>> } >>> >>> start_sqs = nvme_cq_full(cq) ? 1 : 0; >>> - cq->head = new_head;

On 20/11/2015 09:11, Ming Lin wrote: > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 11:37 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> On 18/11/2015 06:47, Ming Lin wrote: >>> @@ -726,7 +798,11 @@ static void nvme_process_db(NvmeCtrl *n, hwaddr addr, int val) >>> } >>> >>> start_sqs = nvme_cq_full(cq) ? 1 : 0; >>> - cq->head = new_head;

All, I''m finally doing my first real form in Rails - the model object that I''m entering information for has 8 validations so far. If I type in good values for all the fields but one, I get the pretty validation, and the nice field highlighting, but all of the fields are cleared, forcing me to retype all of that info. That is a big drag. Is there a standard way to get the

I think having this logic buried within libhid/libusb (libusb:libusb_open(), line 179 to 206) is ultimately a mistake, albeit one that I am probably responsible for. Would it make sense to confine libhid to low-level operations, and leave the decision of trying to reopen vs. retrying to open to the high-level driver, in this case usbhid-ups? I envision that the code in usbhid-ups:reconnect_ups()

...return -EINVAL; else { rq->biotail->bi_next = bio; rq->biotail = bio; rq->__data_len += bio->bi_size; } return 0; } diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c index 160035f..61538b3 100644 --- a/block/blk-merge.c +++ b/block/blk-merge.c @@ -64,19 +64,21 @@ new_segment: fbio->bi_seg_front_size = seg_size; if (seg_size > bbio->bi_seg_back_size) bbio->bi_seg_back_size = seg_size; return nr_phys_segs; } void blk_recalc_rq_segments(struct request *rq) { - rq->nr_phys_segments = __blk_recalc_rq_segments(rq->q, rq->bio); + st...

...return -EINVAL; else { rq->biotail->bi_next = bio; rq->biotail = bio; rq->__data_len += bio->bi_size; } return 0; } diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c index 160035f..61538b3 100644 --- a/block/blk-merge.c +++ b/block/blk-merge.c @@ -64,19 +64,21 @@ new_segment: fbio->bi_seg_front_size = seg_size; if (seg_size > bbio->bi_seg_back_size) bbio->bi_seg_back_size = seg_size; return nr_phys_segs; } void blk_recalc_rq_segments(struct request *rq) { - rq->nr_phys_segments = __blk_recalc_rq_segments(rq->q, rq->bio); + st...

This is, hopefully, a full fix for handling of li-records. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717583 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987463 Rich.