Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "sbenza".
Did you mean:
benz
2016 Jul 26
2
[PATCH] Add support for the 'unless' matcher in the dynamic layer.
...h with
anything more than simply removing the minimums.*
Would this be acceptable or would someone be able to point me at what it
would take to do it the "smart way" in less time than it would take them to
make the change themselves?
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Samuel Benzaquen <sbenza at google.com> wrote:
> One of the reasons we added the minimum was because these nodes added
> overhead to the matching that was not unnecessary when they only had a
> single node.
> On the current implementation we could actually get rid of the node
> completely for the one arg...
2013 Aug 30
1
[LLVMdev] buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-amd64-openbsd
...kremenek,kuba,labath,lattner,lhames,logan,lvoufo,majnemer,mgottesman,mkuper,mpopa,mren,mspencer,nadav,nicholas,nico,olesalscheider,papin_g,pcc,predmond,rafael,rdivacky,redstar,rengolin,resistor,revane,ributzka,rikka,rkotler,rlytton,rmitton,rnk,row,rsandifo,rsmith,rtrieu,rudkx,ruiu,samsonov,sbaranga,sbenza,sdt,sepavloff,shuxin_yang,silvas,stephenwlin,stoklund,sylvestre,tasiraj,timurrrr,tnorthover,tstellar,uweigand,venkatra,vmedic,void,whunt,wpan,wschmidt,ygao,yjiang
>
> BUILD FAILED: failed compile
>
> sincerely,
> -The Buildbot
>
>
>
2016 Jul 26
2
[PATCH] Add support for the 'unless' matcher in the dynamic layer.
I was wondering if there is any objection to removing the 2-element minimum
on the eachOf, anyOf and allOf matchers.
It is frustrating when playing with matchers to have to edit significant
amounts of code to be able to temporarily go from 2 to 1 matcher inside an
any- or allOf matcher.
And overall it feels very "un-set-theory"-like.
The change was made here: