search for: rethought

I rethought it and it seemed like a bad idea to post a big file, so you can get it here: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/flac/junk/flac-1.0-src-candidate.tar.bz2 Josh __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://pe...

...? You need to be really careful and separate different aims. Currently you will definitely sacrifice speed for scriptability. As for cross-compilers - all $ENV & hooks stuff was introduced to transparently switch from one compiler tree into another. Maybe this approach needs to be generalized / rethought. In general, I'd not go this way due to reasons I already mentioned. Maybe it will be better to formulate the aims you want to achieve and think how they can be solved within current infrastructure, or, if this won't be enough - think how it can be extended in the full generality. -- Wit...

> If you don't care about such things - go ahead and think about sane > design proposal, how one can hook any extra scripting language for > llvmc2 without slowdown of 'main path'. This surely will be accepted! Okay, I'll focus on this. The idea is that the TableGen-based configuration would be preloaded into llvmc2, and then user-specified Lua scripts, if supplied,

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:53 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > As I said in my first email perhaps the TTI->FTTI transition is a good > place to start working here without having to worry much about redoing huge > swaths of llvm. FWIW, TTI is next on my hit list for porting to the new pass manager. In order to work in that world, the entire thing needs to

...d the third will pass the sources via some annotation tool and produce an annotated x86 binary. Besides, "toolset=gcc" can become "toolset=msvc" on windows, and it will have high chances of working. > 2. The entire llvm-test project would have to either be completely > rethought or stay the way it is, it just can't be easily automake'd > because it doesn't follow the automake pattern. > > 3. The llvm/test directory would require significant rework to get it to > automake correctly (via dejagnu). No comments on the two points above yet. > 4. The...

...automake to build bytecode. Without a lot of customization of automake itself, it just can't grok the fact that there might be multiple ways to compile a c/c++ program producing different results and requiring different tools. 2. The entire llvm-test project would have to either be completely rethought or stay the way it is, it just can't be easily automake'd because it doesn't follow the automake pattern. 3. The llvm/test directory would require significant rework to get it to automake correctly (via dejagnu). 4. There's no way to avoid listing all the sources for every librar...

...d to compile the rest of the project (llc, lli and so on). They use the llvm-gcc-frontend to compile and link those libraries into llvm bytecode. The resulting files end up in runtime/GC/SemiSpace/BytecodeObj > > 2. The entire llvm-test project would have to either be completely > > rethought or stay the way it is, it just can't be easily automake'd > > because it doesn't follow the automake pattern. > > > > 3. The llvm/test directory would require significant rework to get it to > > automake correctly (via dejagnu). > > No comments on the two p...

...lly careful and separate different aims. Currently > you will definitely sacrifice speed for scriptability. As for > cross-compilers - all $ENV & hooks stuff was introduced to > transparently switch from one compiler tree into another. Maybe this > approach needs to be generalized / rethought. > > In general, I'd not go this way due to reasons I already mentioned. > Maybe it will be better to formulate the aims you want to achieve and > think how they can be solved within current infrastructure, or, if > this won't be enough - think how it can be extended in the f...

...unmaintained for a very long > time. Restricting to such a version makes Python-written tools in LLVM > (mostly LIT) hard to maintain because many features long taken for granted > don’t work on 2.4 For short term, you can maintain for py24, because my buildbot is visible to public. But I rethought it would be an opportunity to get rid of older python. FYI, Red hat has been maintaining his packages, including python as bugfixes. (clones may track upstream...) > Is there a chance you could upgrade your bot(s) to a younger Python? We should implement an option to detect and specify qualif...

...en authorization and actual setting of the effective uid? On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Toni L. Harbaugh-Blackford <harbaugh at nciaxp.ncifcrf.gov> said: > > It appears that the integration of the sia session setup will either > > have to be rethought or abandoned in order for privsep to work. > > That was the conclusion I came to a while back. I'd like to keep > pre-auth privsep (because that works fine and does help somewhat), but I > don't think it is possible to do post-auth privsep on Tru64, at least > whe...

...when I was working in computer graphics; it was routinely used to speed up image-wide operations. With a few properly devised C pre-processor macros, it was made easy to use (I thrown mine away a few years ago, recognizing I lost interest in low-level coding matters, the macros could easily be rethought anyway). Questions existed at the time about unrolled loops fitting or not within specialised fetch-next-instruction caches of some CPUs, but nowadays, memory caches are much bigger then they used to be, I have the prejudice it is just not a problem anymore. Maybe more of a concern might be t...

...itical correctness merit, or it has no value at all. If renaming the branch to 'main' or 'trunk' makes it easier for people to reason about the branch setup then fine. But if it's "to address a past wrong that has absolutely no relation to the project" it needs to be rethought. And I'll go so far as to say that this frivolous renaming occurring across the board is doing more harm than good in the name of 'respecting the last few centuries', as it forces people to highlight that aspect of history, and not move on as a society. A master branch is the source o...

Hi Toni, I'm sorry, I haven't had much time to work on this today. When I run sshd (from the patched snapshot) in a debugger, with a breakpoint early in setup_sia(), this is what I find after connecting with a client: (1) There are two sshd processes. One is running as root, and the other as the user I logged with using the client. The root process is the one in the debugger,

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 14:45:37 +0100 Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 12:57, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I like "dev" as an option here. It's short, and in addition, > > conveys the fact that the development happens in that branch. > > "main" in

Hi, I'd like to make a legend with a mix of mathematical symbol (tau), numeric variable and character variables.I have tried : types<-c("Type 1","Type 2","Type 2") tau<-c(1,3,2) legend(x="topright",legend=paste(types,"tau=",expression(tau))) but it doesn't work: the 'tau' symbol is not written in its 'symbol

On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 05:15:21PM -0700, Josh Coalson wrote: > I rethought it and it seemed like a bad idea to post > a big file, so you can get it here: > > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/flac/junk/flac-1.0-src-candidate.tar.bz2 With the attached patch, a complete "make distcheck" should work, including the self-tests. It adds missin...

...I believe it would be a lot quicker if Mike or Jon could have a look and fix it themselves. Please help me to fix these!!! So, to summarize the work to be done to fix all bugs in XCP in Debian: #687284, #675055: scripts/xe-reset-networking and scripts/xe-edit-bootloader would need to be rewrote / rethought for Debian #675052, #678723: would need attention from upstream. We're nearly close to a clean package with no bugs just right before the Wheezy release. I would really be nice to see these 4 remaining issue closed. PLEASE HELP! Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

One more update. The Makefile.am for analyze was wrong. It wasn't linking in the some of the passes. The new size is 56951088 which is in line with the other executables. Also, I have now completed a run of projects/llvm-test/MultiSource with the tools generated by automake. The only errors were for: TEST (llc) 'sgefa' FAILED! TEST (jit) 'sgefa' FAILED! TEST (jit)

--- Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 05:15:21PM -0700, Josh Coalson wrote: > > > I rethought it and it seemed like a bad idea to post > > a big file, so you can get it here: > > > > > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/flac/junk/flac-1.0-src-candidate.tar.bz2 > > With the attached patch, a complete "make distcheck" should work, > includ...

recently though about image captions, then i realized that this could be achiebed by Markdown Extra's definition list feature:  : here goes the *caption* What do you think? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: