Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "structual".
Did you mean:
structural
2013 Nov 03
1
[LLVMdev] conditional flow resulting in "Instruction does not dominate all uses!"
...my blocks look like this:
entry:
store 0, return_path
result = invoke func to defer_block unwind landing
landing:
landingpad
store 1, return_path
br defer_block
defer_block:
stuff
switch return_path, next_step [
0, next_step
1, rethrow
]
next_step:
val = load result ; error here
Structually the `next_step` has multiple preceding blocks, one of which
doesnt' define `result`. That results in the error. However, based on
the switching value `return_path` there is no way we can arrive at
`next_step` unless result has actually been set. Is there some way I can
tell LLVM this? Somehow...
2004 Feb 10
0
Maybe this has already been discusses LDAPv3
I think I have already seen this discussed. If so, where is a good
"searchable" samba archive?
Does samba 3 work with LDAPv3?
I dumped my ldap database to ldif, and tried to add it to my test server
running openldap 2.1.22-8 and got all kinds of violation errors. i.e. no
structual objectclass provided, this was for my computer accounts, that
have top, posixAccount, sambaSAMAccount objectClasses.
Any Ideas, or can you point me to a searchable samba archive if this has
been discussed previously.
Thanks,
Spencer
2006 Dec 22
5
substitute creates an object which prints incorrectly (PR#9427)
The function "substitute" seems to fail to make a genuine
substitution, although the printed verision seems fine. Here is an
example.
> m <- substitute(Y <- function(x) FUN(x+1),
+ list(Y = as.name("y"), FUN = as.name("sin")))
> m
y <- function(x) sin(x + 1)
> eval(m)
> y
function(x) FUN(x+1)
However the story doesn't end there. The