search for: strval

...7 @@ * David Reveman <davidr@novell.com> */ +#define _GNU_SOURCE /* for asprintf */ #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> @@ -895,7 +854,6 @@ iniSaveOptions (CompDisplay *d, while (nOption--) { status = FALSE; - strVal = strdup (""); int i; switch (option->type) @@ -907,8 +865,11 @@ iniSaveOptions (CompDisplay *d, case CompOptionTypeColor: case CompOptionTypeMatch: strVal = iniOptionValueToString (&option->value, option->type); - if (strVal[0] != '\0') + if (strVal) +...

...rying to get a function not to be inlined. What are llvm's rules pertaining to inlining? I have tried all of the standard gcc options for turning off inlining and they do not seem to work. Here is the sample code that I am working with: #include <stdio.h> void print_string(char* strval); int main() { char* strval = "Hello world\n"; while(1){ print_string(strval); sleep(15); } return 0; } void print_string(char* strval) { int i; for(i=0;i<12;i++){ putc(strval[i], stdout); } } gcc 3.2.2 does not inline this by default. Also, on llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/demo,...

I'm writing a C compiler in OCaml and I've run into a small problem. I wrote the following piece of code to generate a pointer to a string constant, so I could compile C expressions of the form "const char* p = "test\n";" : let strval = const_stringz codecontext v in dump_value strval; dump_value i32_zero; const_gep strval [| i32_zero; i32_zero |] The dump statements I put confirm that the string array and the index values have the types I would expect: [6 x i8] c"test\0A\00" i32 0 However, the code still seems to b...

This patch introduces a handful of new options, I mentioned earlier in: http://www.mail-archive.com/nut-upsdev at lists.alioth.debian.org/msg02088.html See the large commit message in the follow-up for the details and rationale. I realize it's a bit larger diff - so if it's required I can split it into few smaller ones. Michal Soltys (1): APC smart driver update and new features.

>From the language guide: "The one non-intuitive notation for constants is the optional hexadecimal form of floating point constants. For example, the form 'double 0x432ff973cafa8000' is equivalent to (but harder to read than) 'double 4.5e+15'. The only time hexadecimal floating point constants are required (and the only time that they are generated by the disassembler) is

This is 2nd version of the earlier patch featuring a few new features and fixes to the apcsmart driver, following the remarks in: http://www.mail-archive.com/nut-upsdev at lists.alioth.debian.org/msg02294.html Major changes from v1: - handle battery.charge and battery.runtime checks at main.c level - handle "immutable but writable" conflict gracefully at driver level -

...ret_cast<const uint32_t *>(&Data), > reinterpret_cast<const uint32_t *>(&Data + 1)); > } > > Similarly, these need to go through a union to avoid TBAA problems. > > I'm not sure how that works. Can you give an example? > > void add(StringRef StrVal) { > addImpl(StrVal.data(), StrVal.size()); > } > > I'm contradicting my stance above about not caring about the > implementation :), but is MurmurHash a good hash for string data? > The Bernstein hash function works really well and is much cheaper to > compute than...

Sorry for a bit longer delay than I anticipated, I was stuffed with the work. This is the next iteration of the patch adding some functionality to apcsmart driver, and relying on 'ignorelb' recently added. Follow up from previous thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/nut-upsdev at lists.alioth.debian.org/msg02331.html Main differences is that V3 is split into many small patches, so the

...+ 1)); > } > > Similarly, these need to go through a union to avoid TBAA problems. > > I'm not sure how that works. Can you give an example? Just use: void add(double Data) { union { double D; uint64_t I; }; D = Data; add(I); } > > void add(StringRef StrVal) { > addImpl(StrVal.data(), StrVal.size()); > } > > I'm contradicting my stance above about not caring about the implementation :), but is MurmurHash a good hash for string data? The Bernstein hash function works really well and is much cheaper to compute than Murmur. It is...

...;(&Data), >       reinterpret_cast<const uint32_t *>(&Data + 1)); >   } > > Similarly, these need to go through a union to avoid TBAA problems. These are just wrong: they'll hash +0 and -0 to different values even though they compare ==. > >  void add(StringRef StrVal) { >     addImpl(StrVal.data(), StrVal.size()); >   } > > I'm contradicting my stance above about not caring about the implementation > :), but is MurmurHash a good hash for string data?  The Bernstein hash > function works really well and is much cheaper to compute than Murmu...

...{ ++CurPtr; - while (isalnum(CurPtr[0]) || CurPtr[0] == '-' || CurPtr[0] == '$' || + while (isalnum(CurPtr[0]) || CurPtr[0] == '-' || CurPtr[0] == '$' || CurPtr[0] == '.' || CurPtr[0] == '_') ++CurPtr; llvmAsmlval.StrVal = new std::string(TokStart+1, CurPtr); // Skip @ return GLOBALVAR; } - + // Handle GlobalVarID: @[0-9]+ if (isdigit(CurPtr[0])) { - for (++CurPtr; isdigit(CurPtr[0]); ++CurPtr); - + for (++CurPtr; isdigit(CurPtr[0]); ++CurPtr) + ; + uint64_t Val = atoull(TokSta...

...(&Data + 1)); } /// Add a double void add(double Data) { addImpl( reinterpret_cast<const uint32_t *>(&Data), reinterpret_cast<const uint32_t *>(&Data + 1)); } Similarly, these need to go through a union to avoid TBAA problems. void add(StringRef StrVal) { addImpl(StrVal.data(), StrVal.size()); } I'm contradicting my stance above about not caring about the implementation :), but is MurmurHash a good hash for string data? The Bernstein hash function works really well and is much cheaper to compute than Murmur. It is used by HashString...

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 February 2012 00:59, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > Here's my latest version of Hashing.h, which I propose to add to > llvm/ADT. > > Comments welcome and encouraged. > > > /// Adapted from MurmurHash2 by Austin Appleby > > Just out of curiosity, why not

...Nyx wrote: > > I'm writing a C compiler in OCaml and I've run into a small problem. I wrote > the following piece of code to generate a pointer to a string constant, so I > could compile C expressions of the form "const char* p = "test\n";" : > > let strval = const_stringz codecontext v in > dump_value strval; > dump_value i32_zero; > const_gep strval [| i32_zero; i32_zero |] > > The dump statements I put confirm that the string array and the index values > have the types I would expect: > > [6 x i8] c"test\0A\00" &...

...union to avoid TBAA problems. >> >> I'm not sure how that works. Can you give an example? > > > Just use: > > void add(double Data) { > union { > double D; uint64_t I; > }; > D = Data; > add(I); > } > > >> void add(StringRef StrVal) { >> addImpl(StrVal.data(), StrVal.size()); >> } >> >> I'm contradicting my stance above about not caring about the >> implementation :), but is MurmurHash a good hash for string data? >> The Bernstein hash function works really well and is much cheap...

Hey everyone, I am brand new to Xapian so forgive me if I am just being noob. I looked over the sparse documentation for the Xapian library and its PHP hooks and I am really confused how to complete my index. I understand how to add documents etc etc etc and how to build queries but how I do specify in add_value what field type xapian should take (i.e. tokenized, unindexed, indexed)? Is there

..._len = BSWAP_32(*(uint32_t *)nvp); + nvp += 4; + + /* skip over name */ + nvp = nvp + ((name_len + 3) & ~3); /* align */ + + type = BSWAP_32(*(uint32_t *)nvp); + + return (type); +} + +static int +nvpair_value(char *nvp, void *val, int valtype, int *nelmp) +{ + int name_len, type, slen; + char *strval = val; + uint64_t *intval = val; + + /* skip over encode/decode size */ + nvp += 4 * 2; + + /* skip over name_len */ + name_len = BSWAP_32(*(uint32_t *)nvp); + nvp += 4; + + /* skip over name */ + nvp = nvp + ((name_len + 3) & ~3); /* align */ + + /* skip over type */ + type = BSWAP_32(*(uint32...

...n a PHP based deployment of Xapian > i can tell you i struggled somewhat with the same thing. > The PHP wrapper really doesn't clue you in as to what types you should be > passing to any given method, so you'll find yourself having to wrap a lot > of > stuff with intval( ) or strval( ) for the methods to work correctly, > which is a side effect of trying to use a wrapper designed for a strongly > typed language with a loosely typed one. > > That being said, the api docs are spot on for the most part, i'd recommend > cracking open xapian.php and reading it in...

Am 28.08.2011 20:02, schrieb geovanisouza92 at gmail.com: > Hi, Jo! > > I'm trying create a new programming language, and I want that it have > Unicode support (support for read and manipulate rightly the source-code and > string literals). > > But, in addition, my programming language supports "string interpolation" > string, and in these interpolations, tiny

...(1, "On-line - forcing OB temporarily"); ser_send_char(upsfd, 'U'); - usleep(UPSDELAY); + struct timespec delay = {0, UPSDELAY}; nanosleep(&delay, NULL); } return sdcmd_S(tval); } @@ -837,6 +837,7 @@ static int sdcmd_ATn(int cnt) int n = 0, mmax, ret; const char *strval; char timer[4]; + struct timespec delay; mmax = cnt == 2 ? 99 : 999; @@ -853,7 +854,8 @@ static int sdcmd_ATn(int cnt) upsdebugx(1, "Issuing hard hibernate with %d minutes additional wakeup delay", n*6); ser_send_char(upsfd, APC_CMD_GRACEDOWN); - usleep(CMDLONGDELAY); + dela...