search for: outputbuffers

For the reasons listed in my 03-May-2012 email, I am proposing a new llvm/Support class for using in writing binary files: /// OutputBuffer - This interface provides simple way to create an in-memory /// buffer which when done will be written to a file. During the lifetime of /// these objects, the content or existence of the specified file is undefined. /// That is, creating an OutputBuffer

FWIW, I'd be interested in working on the Windows implementation. I've been knee-deep in *nixes lately and wouldn't mind the refresher. :) Gordon Keiser Software Development Engineer Arxan Technologies w:+1.765.889.4756 gkeiser at arxan.com www.arxan.com<http://www.arxan.com/> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Nick

On May 8, 2012, at 3:52 AM, Gordon Keiser wrote: > FWIW, I'd be interested in working on the Windows implementation. I've been knee-deep in *nixes lately and wouldn't mind the refresher. J Cool! Does my proposed interface make sense to implement on top of Windows APIs? -Nick > > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > For the reasons listed in my 03-May-2012 email, I am proposing a new > llvm/Support class for using in writing binary files: > > /// OutputBuffer - This interface provides simple way to create an in-memory > /// buffer which when done will be written to a file. During the lifetime > of >

On May 8, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: >> For the reasons listed in my 03-May-2012 email, I am proposing a new >> llvm/Support class for using in writing binary files: >> >> /// OutputBuffer - This interface provides simple way to create an in-memory >> /// buffer

On May 8, 2012, at 4:08 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 8, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: >>> For the reasons listed in my 03-May-2012 email, I am proposing a new >>> llvm/Support class for using in writing binary files: >>>

On May 3, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > Existing llvm code tends to use raw_ostream for writing files. But raw_ostream is not a good match for a linker for a couple of reasons: > > 1) When the linker creates an executable, the file needs the 'x' bit set. Currently raw_fd_ostream has no way to set that. If this were the only problem, I'd suggest just generalizing

Existing llvm code tends to use raw_ostream for writing files. But raw_ostream is not a good match for a linker for a couple of reasons: 1) When the linker creates an executable, the file needs the 'x' bit set. Currently raw_fd_ostream has no way to set that. 2) The Unix conformance suite actually has some test cases where the linker is run and the output file does exists but is not

Any idea what might be wrong? ActionView::Template::Error (undefined method `+@'' for #<ActionView::OutputBuffer:0x00000002e51580>): -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to

Hi Steven, Look at my replies inline (below your comments). Katya. From: stevenwu at apple.com <stevenwu at apple.com> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:46 PM To: Romanova, Katya <katya.romanova at sony.com> Cc: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com>; Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com>; Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com>; Peter Collingbourne

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 6:03 PM, <katya.romanova at sony.com> wrote: > Hi Steven, > > Look at my replies inline (below your comments). > > Katya. > > > > *From:* stevenwu at apple.com <stevenwu at apple.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:46 PM > *To:* Romanova, Katya <katya.romanova at sony.com> > *Cc:* Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at

I'm not sure if anyone is experienced with this but i'm having very strange issues with implementing speex in my iOS application. I have written a encode and decode function basically exactly like the example files online. To process audio I am using an iOS VoiceProcessingIO Audio Unit which is set at 16bit pcm with 8000 sample rate. After buffering 320 bytes of PCM audio I feed it into

Hi, I''m working to patch actionpack/lib/action_view/helpers/ cache_helper.rb so that it doesn''t throw when ouput_buffer isn''t ActionView::OutputBuffer but is still html_safe. In 3-0-stable the function contains the following if: if output_buffer.is_a?(ActionView::OutputBuffer) safe_output_buffer = output_buffer.to_str fragment =

Hi Peter, Thank you for the clarification ☺. I’m sure you have a very good understanding of how much efforts it will take to write a patch for legacy C LTO to implement caching the same way it’s done in new C++ LTO API. How easy/difficult do you think it will be (very roughly, in LOC)? Do you anticipate that a lot of existing legacy C LTO infrastructure will have to be rewritten? Could this also

> On Mar 26, 2018, at 6:03 PM, katya.romanova at sony.com wrote: > > Hi Steven, > Look at my replies inline (below your comments). > Katya. > > From: stevenwu at apple.com <mailto:stevenwu at apple.com> <stevenwu at apple.com <mailto:stevenwu at apple.com>> > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:46 PM > To: Romanova, Katya <katya.romanova at sony.com

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:34 PM, <katya.romanova at sony.com> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > > > Thank you for the clarification J. > > > > I’m sure you have a very good understanding of how much efforts it will > take to write a patch for legacy C LTO to implement caching the same way > it’s done in new C++ LTO API. How easy/difficult do you think it will be >

Hi Steven and Peter, I think we resolved all the misunderstanding/concerns that we had with the proposal and decided that we don’t have to implement heavy-weight synchronization solutions (such as read-write locks, etc). Lightweight solution is expected to work on MacOS and Windows (however, there might be issues with Windows supporting non-NTFS file systems). There are two options for the

Hi everyone, I'm trying to encode/decode with speex, when I do not, the audio is loud and clear, but when I encode/decode to test audio quality, I get a really poor audio quality and a robotic sound. Here's my init audio method : #define AUDIO_QUALITY 10 - (void) initAudio { try { //SPEEX CONFIG speex_bits_init(&bits_in);

Hi Katya Thanks for investigating this. Here is my thought inline. > On Mar 22, 2018, at 1:32 AM, katya.romanova at sony.com wrote: > > > Hello, > > I am sending the following proposal to discuss issues and solutions regarding data races in concurrent ThinLTO processes. > > This caught my attention when we encountered a race condition in ThinLTO with caching. >

Hi I apologise if the following message is inappropriate for this list. However, I feel this is the only place where I can get some help with my problem. BOOL CALLBACK RecordProc(HRECORD hRecord, void *buffer, DWORD length, DWORD user) { try { long sent = 0; long inputOffset = 0; long outputOffset = 0; long nbBytes = 0; char *outputBuffer = NULL;