Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "remangled".
Did you mean:
demangled
2000 Apr 12
6
Well done!
Great job!
I'm considering converting all my mp3 files to Vorbis format. Only
examples/encoder_example is a bit too simplistic (of course, being an
example), and the cmdline tools aren't ready.
I encode my mp3 files at 96 kbit/s, because that's enough for me.
Will Vorbis do well at this rate? Any quick hacks I can make to
examples/encoder_example.c?
Perhaps Vorbis is of interest
2004 Feb 18
1
Samba 3.02 with dos filenames - still not working!
...e default mangling method
in samba3 from hash2 to hash. hash2 behaves more like Windows mangling.
> mangling method = hash
Either take this line out or change it to hash2. You may need to take
care that existing filenames whose names have already been mangled with
the hash method get remangled with hash2 method.
~ Daniel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is the property of Time Inc. or its affiliates. It may be
legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
of the addressee(s). No addressee should...
2019 Jun 19
3
Running debuginfo-tests with Dexter
...there be for a
debugger integration tool? There was mention in [0] of tests for
Microsoft specific extensions (I assume extended debugging
facilities), knowing the scope of extra information involved would
help us design around it.
Note that the current Dexter codebase is going to be significantly
remangled, we're trying to decouple the expected-behaviour language
from the debugger-abstractions summary of how the program behaved.
[0] https://reviews.llvm.org/D54187#1290282
[1] https://github.com/SNSystems/dexter
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRT_GmpGjXE
[3] https://llvm.org/devmtg/2018-04/s...
2015 Nov 13
2
[PATCH] D14358: DWARF's forward decl of a template should have template parameters.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 6:16 AM, <Peter_Marshall at sn.scee.net> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Sorry for the delay, I've been out of the office.
>
> I think this example shows that name matching does not always work:
>
> template<typename T> class A {
> public:
> A(T val);
> private:
> T x;
> };
>
> struct B {
> typedef
2015 Dec 09
2
[PATCH] D14358: DWARF's forward decl of a template should have template parameters.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Robinson, Paul <
Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
> That doesn't seem to be the DWARF I'm seeing from Clang (& it'd be
> surprising if we used the typedef (or otherwise non-canonical) name in the
> class name):
>
>
>
> Finally getting back to this….. Ha. We don't unwrap the typedefs ("name
> as
2015 Dec 09
2
[PATCH] D14358: DWARF's forward decl of a template should have template parameters.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Robinson, Paul <
Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
> Actually no, we prefer to have the original typedef names in the
> instantiation name, for source fidelity.
>
Then perhaps you should keep this change in your tree too - since that's
where the need is?
> "Name as it is in the source" or something reasonably close.
2015 Dec 09
2
[PATCH] D14358: DWARF's forward decl of a template should have template parameters.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Robinson, Paul <
Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
> Maybe we are being too pedantic about the names. I'll have to go back and
> look in detail at why we decided to do that.
>
>
>
> In any case, arguably 5.5.8 (Class Template Instantiations) 1 only applies
> to definitions of a type, not declarations. ("Each formal