search for: reusable

...ing that what > > >> library support we already have has had a disproportional cost? > > > > > > The library-hostile lld development goes against one the core > > > principles that, I believe, drives the LLVM development: providing > > > libraries and reusable components. > > > > Because it is trying to do something fundamentally different. We are > > trying to write a *program*. > > But this is not a technical argument. As a project, we rarely write > programs, as such. We generally create reusable components that happen to &g...

Hi All, Is that possible to make tinc as a reusable lib to make it more widely used in IOT world? and make release an official app for IOS、Android and windows possible? Tks.

Is there a development guide for best practices when making reusable components? For example, none of the login generators fit my requirements, and I want to write my own. But after I''m done, I''ll want to share it with multiple applications. Is there documentation for the right way to go about doing this? -- - Adam ** Expert Technical Proj...

On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 10:18:46PM +0800, Cong Monkey wrote: > Is that possible to make tinc as a reusable lib to make it more widely > used in IOT world? Yes, have a look at MeshLink: https://github.com/meshlink/meshlink > and make release an official app for IOS、Android and windows possible? I would love to, but I have no time myself to do that. There is an unofficial Android app: http://ti...

Hello, I''m using the scheduler to create several reusable workers of the same type, .e.g., RSSWorker, so I can avoid the overhead of initializing new processes (as suggested by Ezra to my previous question). Creating new workers through the external yaml seems pretty straightforward, but my question is is there a way to call these workers without using th...

...ing priorities and observing that what > >> library support we already have has had a disproportional cost? > > > > The library-hostile lld development goes against one the core > > principles that, I believe, drives the LLVM development: providing > > libraries and reusable components. > > Because it is trying to do something fundamentally different. We are > trying to write a *program*. But this is not a technical argument. As a project, we rarely write programs, as such. We generally create reusable components that happen to have driver executables. At le...

Hi, Anyone know a way to traverse/query the DOM in a response? I''m trying to write reusable story step implementations and as much as possible want to work with the actual response from a previous GET. As an example, I often have buttons that POST/PUT a hidden value. My goal is a reusable step implementation that takes the button label and works the existing response DOM to make an appro...

...al > > > >> cost? > > > > > > > > > > The library-hostile lld development goes against one the core > > > > > principles that, I believe, drives the LLVM development: > > > > providing > > > > > libraries and reusable components. > > > > > > > > Because it is trying to do something fundamentally different. We > > > are > > > > trying to write a *program*. > > > But this is not a technical argument. As a project, we rarely write > > programs, as suc...

...quot; ) ... <= Template using <%= ntp_server %> } service { ntpd ... } } class ntp_client_domain1 inherits abstract_ntp_client { $ntp_server = "server.domain1.com" } node node1 { include ntp_client_domain1 } I guess my problem is that I would like to have some kind of reusable definitions that I can "instantiate" providing some parameters, so I can describe classes and nodes using those definitions as building blocks (the same as puppet types, I guess). From that point of view solution 1 seems the right one, but as the documentation states, this could cause pro...

Hi All, I'd like to know what is the best way to organize R code in multiple modules= and files. The R code we are writing is too much for a single file. Besides= , there are a lot of reusable functions we'd like to factor out. But writing= a package for that is quite an over-kill and might be too inflexible. So what is the best way to organize R code into multiple files and reusable= modules? Thanks, Geoffrey _______________________________________________________=0A= =0A= =...

> However, it is not very beginner friendly. There's two thing lacking: > editting the configuration files from the app, and being able to run the > app without root privileges. For the latter, the app and maybe tinc > itself might need to be changed to use the VPN API to create a tun > device and to pass it to the tinc daemon. I don't even know if there is > something

On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 10:40:12PM +0800, Cong Monkey wrote: > If release as libtinc possible, will that possible that you relicence > TINC as LGPL to make commercial use possible? Both tinc and MeshLink are licensed under the GPL and will stay that way. However, if you want to use MeshLink in a commercial project, you can buy a commercial license. -- Met vriendelijke groet / with kind

Just wait tinc be more lib style for some future days:) 2016-10-09 22:45 GMT+08:00 Guus Sliepen <guus at tinc-vpn.org>: > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 10:40:12PM +0800, Cong Monkey wrote: > >> If release as libtinc possible, will that possible that you relicence >> TINC as LGPL to make commercial use possible? > > Both tinc and MeshLink are licensed under the GPL and will

I was planning to make an iOS port, but GPL means we can't make an App Store version. Also, the way Network Extension work means only tun mode is available. Sent from my iPhone > On 9 Oct 2016, at 23:55, Cong Monkey <congzhangzh at gmail.com> wrote: > > Just wait tinc be more lib style for some future days:) > > 2016-10-09 22:45 GMT+08:00 Guus Sliepen <guus at

> I was planning to make an iOS port, but GPL means we can't make an App Store version. Also, the way Network Extension work means only tun mode is available. I think GPL just forbidden link from(which need more link exception statement be added) but not link to Ne extension work with link from style? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Network extension apps are just like ordinary apps, only they can utilize the utun interface and create VPN entries. So I think, yes, tinc need to be linked from such apps. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 10, 28 Heisei, at 9:48, Cong Monkey <congzhangzh at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I was planning to make an iOS port, but GPL means we can't make an App Store version. Also,

2016-10-11 3:52 GMT+08:00 Mr.X <mrx at hcc.im>: > Network extension apps are just like ordinary apps, only they can utilize > the utun interface and create VPN entries. So I think, yes, tinc need to be > linked from such apps. link to and link from is mark as the main application's view, so, for NE extension it's link to libtinc( if there is a libtinc lib), that's

...would be done without affecting the overall linker architecture. I don't oppose to that idea, and if someone wrote a patch, I'm fine with that. I’m totally willing to believe you that it is not possible to write the fastest ELF linker on earth (or in the universe) with a library based and reusable components approach. But clang is not the fastest C/C++ compiler available, and LLVM is not the fastest compiler framework either! So as a project, it seems to me that LLVM has not put the tradeoff on the speed/efficiency historically when it was to the detriment of layering/component/modularity/r...

...I just noticed that the following code.. When ''I login'' When ''I do something else'' ...will output as... When ''I login'' And ''I do something else'' The same is true for two ''Then'' steps That is really cool! Reusable steps and coherent English output. - Andy -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Story-Runner%3A-Two-%27then%27-steps-output-as-%27then..and%27-%3A%29-tf4625856.html#a13209643 Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

...d many other "LLVM branded" projects. > The first thing that comes up to my mind with regard to pushing LLD forward > as an LLVM project is to move more code to LLVM libraries so that we can > make LLD smaller. What do you think? As you and Rafael have said in this thread, the reusable part of linkers is not that big, so having LLD libraries in objdump (for example) may not be practical, but having a separate (small) symbol handling library that both use could be a potential way forward. I don't know enough about LLD or objdump to have any concrete opinion, but I have a feeli...