search for: unnecessay

Mmm, do you see that patch? Because the order of those linked library is incorrect. Mingw can't generate libCindex.dll. So I midified the likage order. Also, for the reason of removing duplicated code, I removed some unnecessay cmake code. And add an new cmake function 2009/10/7, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>: > > On Oct 7, 2009, at 8:36 AM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) wrote: > >> That does not mean that every library or application built within >> the LLVM tree must be linked as C++. >> T...

> > I've committed my suggested fix. There's no point in setting the > LINKER_LANGUAGE property of every LLVM library, because CMake figures out > the right language based on the file extensions of the source files. Yes, CMake figures out the *right language* based on the file extensions of the source files. But, llvm is based on *C++* for example, if you create a application

...er machine than I do. $ ../llvm/configure && make -j4 ... $ time make -j4 real 0m5.840s user 0m5.232s sys 0m1.388s $ time make -j4 real 0m1.788s user 0m2.304s sys 0m0.484s The first run of `time make -j4' took so much because it updated LLVMLibDeps.txt, which was unnecessay (a bug?). After that all runs takes well below 2 seconds. That was LLVM alone, no Clang, although including it would not increase the build time by much. Today, my quadcore machine costs less than 400 euros. Any professional developer on the western countries should have no problem having a much f...

Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> writes: > greened at obbligato.org (David A. Greene) writes: > >> Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> writes: >> >>> A good measure of how fast a set of Makefile are is to run the build >>> with all targets up-to-date. Both builds takes a few seconds (3 or so) >>> on my Linux quad core box. Whatever

> On Apr 12, 2016, at 8:31 AM, Sarah Goslee <sarah.goslee at gmail.com> wrote: > > I am very interested in such a distributed documentation editing > project, and have some thoughts on how to make it workable for both > volunteers and core members who would need to review. > > I'm willing to lead or colead such a project, if someone stepping up > would be a

I am very interested in such a distributed documentation editing project, and have some thoughts on how to make it workable for both volunteers and core members who would need to review. I'm willing to lead or colead such a project, if someone stepping up would be a useful first step, and I'm also willing to host a wiki, although I think something like GitHub is probably the best place.

Further cleanup of the hv drivers. 1) Implement code for autoloading the vmbus drivers without using PCI or DMI signatures. I have implemented this based on Greg's feedback on my earlier implementation. 2) Cleanup error handling across the board and use standard Linux error codes. 3) General cleanup Regards, K. Y

Further cleanup of the hv drivers. 1) Implement code for autoloading the vmbus drivers without using PCI or DMI signatures. I have implemented this based on Greg's feedback on my earlier implementation. 2) Cleanup error handling across the board and use standard Linux error codes. 3) General cleanup Regards, K. Y

Further cleanup of the hv drivers. Back in June I had sent two patch sets to address these issues. I have addressed the comments I got from the community on my earlier patches here: 1) Implement code for autoloading the vmbus drivers without using PCI or DMI signatures. I have implemented this based on Greg's feedback on my earlier implementation. 2) Cleanup error handling across

Further cleanup of the hv drivers. Back in June I had sent two patch sets to address these issues. I have addressed the comments I got from the community on my earlier patches here: 1) Implement code for autoloading the vmbus drivers without using PCI or DMI signatures. I have implemented this based on Greg's feedback on my earlier implementation. 2) Cleanup error handling across