search for: overriding

While doing the conversion of LLVM_OVERRIDE to 'override' last night, I noticed that the code base is rather inconsistent on whether the 'virtual' keyword is also used when 'override' is used. Should we have a coding standard for this? What's the preferred direction here? Seems not having 'virtual' is less overall text, but not sure how others feel. Related,

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:02 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> > wrote: > > While doing the conversion of LLVM_OVERRIDE to 'override' last night, I > > noticed that the code base is rather inconsistent on whether the > 'virtual' > > keyword is also used

On Mar 4, 2014, at 7:57 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > On 2014 Mar 4, at 15:01, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:02 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: >>> While doing the

On Mar 4, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:48 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Related, should we require use of 'override' when methods override a base

On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:48 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Related, should we require use of 'override' when methods override a base >>>>> class method? >>>> >>>> My vote: require override. >>> >>> +1: override is useful and prevents errors. >> Would it be too

Hi everybody, As promised before and discused with dimesio here: http://forum.winehq.org/viewtopic.php?p=53507&sid=fd16c6e3e78e533cad6f00e0e4da99dc http://forum.winehq.org/viewtopic.php?t=14962 PlayOnLinux 4.0.16 has integrated a new log system, so that we can follow what happens in a wineprefix. Be careful, this announcement is here just to inform wine users and admins about the way it

On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:53 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> It might be reasonable to warn if a class has both a function marked >> 'override' and a function that overrides but is not marked 'override'. >> >> >> That could be useful - because it means that the author of the class is at >> least thinking about override -

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:53 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > It might be reasonable to warn if a class has both a function marked > 'override' and a function that

Hi there, I just set up a system of fallback streams for our free radio station here but I have this weird problem: it always show zero listeners. Our setup is this: We have a listening mount point for people - that fall back to a live streaming from a cellular phone - that fall back to a live streaming from a base station (a pc), that fall back to a 24/7 archive streaming. No matter what the

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > virtual bar *foo() = 0; > > where foo() also exists as pure in the base class. Clang-modernize has a > FIXME that says it can't find the "=0" to do the insert of override. > Does that mean we have a pure virtual function with implementation in Clang/LLVM? If so, I feel it's a

Are the dovecot environment variables mutable? I'd like to override like: set "${env.vnd.dovecot.username}" "someuser at example.org" Or better, I prefer to override %u Dovecot variable during the userdb lookup. Is either possible? PS, when Sieve does extdata lookups for username key, where does username come from? %u? Does an override as above change the dict

clang-modernize has a -format option that will run clang-format on the code it changes. Ben On Mar 5, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > clang-modernize can add the 'override', but it can't currently delete 'virtual'. It will also potentially overflow 80 columns. And if it removed virtual it would fail to align a second line of

There is one annoyance I''m encountering with the Mock API in rSpec. Overall it works well, as far as dynamic mocks go ;)... but there''s this one thing... It doesn''t allow overriding of expectations. example: m = mock("blah") m.should_receive(:one).any_number_of_times().and_return(1) m.should_receive(:one).and_return(1) The second call to should_receive is ignored. I believe it would be most convenient if the second call to should_receive would override the fi...

After running the tool aginst LLD, I realized that clang-modernize do not add "override" to virtual destructors. I think it's not intended but just that that case is not covered by the tool. On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > Didn't realize that. I'll see if i can figure out how to make it delete > the virtual

Jean-Marc, Attached is a patch (to build 14264) to fix the TI DSP builds with the recent restructuring of libspeex. The change adds a hook in os_support.h to allow the user to override some memory allocation and I/O functions. A similar hook was present in misc.c, but was lost when that file was removed. Also, the size of the private memory allocation area has been reduced, to match

Linux-2.4.28 libusb-0.1.8 nut-2.6.5 [+most recent drivers from GIT] - from tarball EATON 3S700DIN [mfr.date 09/28/14] ---------------------------------- ISSUES: I) Too many kernel logs: --- In /var/log/kernel.log usbdevfs: usb_submit_urb returned -28 In /var/log/daemon.log: usbhid-ups[744]: libusb_get_interrupt: No error usbhid-ups[744]: libusb_get_interrupt: error submitting URB: No space left

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > It also doesn't do pure methods either. I think I don't quite understand what that means. Can you give me an example? > On Thursday, March 6, 2014, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > >> After running the tool aginst LLD, I realized that clang-modernize do not >> add

...>> lookup. >> >> Is either possible? >> >> PS, when Sieve does extdata lookups for username key, where does >> username come from? %u?? Does an override as above change the dict >> lookup key for extdata? > > You could override the %u variable, but overriding it in userdb will > have surprising consequences. Basically this amounts to same as > changing > username for the user. This is useful to work with a older system in my case, username should seem as a new one anyways. I accept the consequence. :) I tried return only "u" in th...

...'gmake' under the directory of my pass. I always got the following error message. I cannot figure out why. Can you have a look and let me know how to fix it? thanks a lot, xiaodong ----------------------------------------------------------- %gmake ../../../Makefile.common:247: warning: overriding commands for target `.so' ../../../Makefile.common:243: warning: ignoring old commands for target `.so' ../../../Makefile.common:251: warning: overriding commands for target `../../../lib/Release/libScalarReplacement' ../../../Makefile.common:243: warning: ignoring old commands for targ...

There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): xen-docs-3.4_3.4.3~rc3-2_all.deb: package says priority is optional, override says extra. xenstore-utils_3.4.3~rc3-2_amd64.deb: package says priority is optional, override says extra. Please note that a list of new sections were recently added to the archive: cli-mono, database, debug,