Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "supportlibrari".
Did you mean:
supportlibrary
2013 May 28
2
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
> Ah, ok. In that case, I think that it would be best to make a new page for
> libSupport, and have it defer to SystemLibrary.rst for discussion of the
> "libSystem" parts of libSupport. The major necessary changes for
> SystemLibrary.rst would then be to mention its inclusion in libSupport
> (important) and fix file paths (mechanical, less important).
Sorry, but at least
2013 May 28
2
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
>> Ideally we would have a
>> docs/SystemLibrary.rst that would just says "this library has been
>> merged to lib/Support" and docs/SupportLibrary.rst documents whatever
>> is in lib/Support.
>
>
> Considering our OS portability layer to be it's own separate thing, even if
> it isn't its own lib/* directory is probably a good distinction to
2013 May 25
4
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
0b5c0c9c868213fee1a8e3b571a96e2e099e8e1e
docs/SupportLibrary.rst | 247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
docs/SystemLibrary.rst | 247 ------------------------------------------------
docs/index.rst | 6 +-
3 files changed, 250 insertions(+), 250 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/SupportLibrary.rst b/docs/SupportLibrary.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36ab49a
---
2013 May 26
1
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
OK, I'll resubmit it.
2013/5/26 David Majnemer <david.majnemer at gmail.com>:
> This patch has changed "System V IPC" to "Support V IPC". This seems to be an accident caused by some sort of automation.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2013, at 7:27 AM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) <luoyonggang at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
2013 May 26
0
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
This patch has changed "System V IPC" to "Support V IPC". This seems to be an accident caused by some sort of automation.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2013, at 7:27 AM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) <luoyonggang at gmail.com> wrote:
> 0b5c0c9c868213fee1a8e3b571a96e2e099e8e1e
> docs/SupportLibrary.rst | 247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
2013 May 28
0
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Rafael Espíndola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ah, ok. In that case, I think that it would be best to make a new page
> for
> > libSupport, and have it defer to SystemLibrary.rst for discussion of the
> > "libSystem" parts of libSupport. The major necessary changes for
> > SystemLibrary.rst would then be to
2013 Nov 19
0
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
I hit upon docs/SystemLibrary.rst today.
Is this documentation useful to anyone? Can I delete it?
Most of the guidelines seem like common sense: Keeping LLVM Portable, High
Level Interface, No Unused Functionality, No Duplicate Implementations, etc.
Some are not really true, like "Minimize Soft Errors". We currently
propagate a lot of file-related soft errors up as
2013 May 28
0
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Rafael Espíndola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> > AFAIK, libSupport does more than what this document describes (for
> example,
> > it contains ADT, which are portable and not system-specific, contrary to
> the
> > second paragraph of the document). Does it make sense to just globally
> > replace "Support"
2013 May 27
3
[LLVMdev] The system library is gone for a long time.
> AFAIK, libSupport does more than what this document describes (for example,
> it contains ADT, which are portable and not system-specific, contrary to the
> second paragraph of the document). Does it make sense to just globally
> replace "Support" for "System"? I wasn't around when the transition was
> made, so I don't know. Please get a confirmation