Displaying 20 results from an estimated 64 matches for "unwarranted".
2010 Oct 30
0
[LLVMdev] Running "make check" on Windows yields lots of unwarrented unexpected failures
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" background="https://img.web.de/v/p.gif" class="bgRepeatYes" style="background-repeat: repeat; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: verdana,geneva; font-size: 9pt; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="min-height: 200px; background-image: url(https://img.web.de/v/p.gif); background-repeat:
2010 Oct 31
0
[LLVMdev] Running "make check" on Windows yields lots of unwarrented unexpected failures (HTML free this time:-)
Dirk,
I am working on tests/win32(s) too.
I can let all tests pass on msvc10 and cygming with my patches,
thought, my patches are incomplete (several of them hide potential problems)
Please see threads below in llvm-commits.
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100927/109077.html
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20101004/109271.html
If you are
2010 Oct 31
2
[LLVMdev] Running "make check" on Windows yields lots of unwarrented unexpected failures (HTML free this time:-)
Hi,
sorry, in my last mail, I didn't check in time that HTML e-mails would
be turned off.
So, checking out llvm/clang yesterday under Win32, building it, and
running the "check"-project using MS Visual Studio yielded 177
unexpected failures, many of which happen because of the different
registers used in passing arguments under Win64 and everybody else
on x86-64.
I would be
2006 Nov 10
3
unwarranted warning from hist.default (PR#9356)
> x = rnorm(100)
> b = seq(min(x) - 1, max(x) + 1, length = 11)
> b
[1] -3.4038769 -2.7451072 -2.0863375 -1.4275678 -0.7687980 -0.1100283
[7] 0.5487414 1.2075111 1.8662808 2.5250506 3.1838203
>
> invisible(hist(x, breaks = b, include.lowest = TRUE, plot = FALSE))
Warning message:
argument 'include.lowest' is not made use of in: hist.default(x,
breaks = b,
2019 Jun 19
5
[RFC] Documentation clarification: Phabricator, not the lists is the main entry point for new patches
...about both the Phabricator review, and review
as mail replies on -commits lists. It also talks about submitting
patches to lists,
with the subtext that it may be friendlier for outsiders.
It is true that Phabricator has some entry threshold, larger than
github, or maillists,
so the attempt is not unwarranted. But from what i can tell, 99.9% patches go
via Phabricator. There is a large chance that such a mail-only patch
will simply be
overlooked, ignored, or the very first reply will be "Please post the patch to
Phabricator".
Both of these cases i would call counter-welcoming.
I don't thi...
2015 Jan 29
7
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
..., but I don't like this approach for a number of reasons:
1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
2) The pdb reading code relies *very heavily* on Windows APIs, and will not
compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake machinery,
but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code in
lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm
accordingly.
Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
Zach
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
U...
2007 Aug 31
1
gsub warning message
...ized escape in a character string
2: unrecognized escape removed from "\."
>
I still get the same result, which is what I want, but now I get a warning
message. Am I actually doing something wrong that the previous versions of
R didn't warn me about? Or is this warning message unwarranted? Is there a
fully approved method for getting the same functionality? Thanks!
-- TMK --
212-460-5430 home
917-656-5351 cell
2004 Oct 02
1
Bug#270019: 270018, 270019 should remain open
...se bugs on all of the following grounds:
1. They are wishlist items, and the wish has not been resolved, simply
dismissed.
2. They are closed on the grounds that the messages are startup
messages. Some are, but some are not.
3. The suggestion that startup messages should not be filtered out
seems unwarranted.
4. I responded to earlier requests for exact log lines, but the bugs
are now being closed because I have not provided filter patterns.
This is essentially a policy that a bug should be closed unless the
user provides the fix. That is unreasonable.
5. The bugs were closed less than one week (and n...
2015 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...his approach for a number of reasons:
>
> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
> 2) The pdb reading code relies *very heavily* on Windows APIs, and will
> not compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake
> machinery, but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>
> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code
> in lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm
> accordingly.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
>
Sounds good. Naming bikeshed:
DWARF/Dwarf and...
2019 Jun 19
2
[RFC] Documentation clarification: Phabricator, not the lists is the main entry point for new patches
...about both the Phabricator review, and review
as mail replies on -commits lists. It also talks about submitting
patches to lists,
with the subtext that it may be friendlier for outsiders.
It is true that Phabricator has some entry threshold, larger than
github, or maillists,
so the attempt is not unwarranted. But from what i can tell, 99.9% patches go
via Phabricator. There is a large chance that such a mail-only patch
will simply be
overlooked, ignored, or the very first reply will be "Please post the patch to
Phabricator".
Both of these cases i would call counter-welcoming.
I don't thi...
2010 Jul 02
3
Attributes of 1st argument in ...
...opying?):
f<-function(...)
{
L<-match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)[[2L]]
x <- eval(substitute(attr(x,"foo"), list(x=L[[1L]])))
if (x=="bar") cbind(...) else x
}
system.time tests showed this second form to be only marginally faster.
Is my fear about extra copying unwarranted? If not, is there a better way to
get the "foo" attribute of the first argument other than my two
alternatives?
Thanks,
Dan Murphy
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
2015 Jan 29
2
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...his approach for a number of reasons:
>
> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
> 2) The pdb reading code relies *very heavily* on Windows APIs, and will
> not compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake
> machinery, but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>
> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code
> in lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm
> accordingly.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
> Zach
>
>
-------------- next part --------...
2015 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...39;t like this approach for a number of reasons:
>
> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
> 2) The pdb reading code relies very heavily on Windows APIs, and will not compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake machinery, but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>
> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code in lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm accordingly.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
> Zach
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML at...
2015 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...his approach for a number of reasons:
>
> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
> 2) The pdb reading code relies *very heavily* on Windows APIs, and will not
> compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake machinery,
> but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>
> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code in
> lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm
> accordingly.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
> Zach
>
>
>
> _______________________...
2017 Jun 21
2
[LLD][COFF] Zero linker-version header field breaks Authenticode on Windows 7
...ned lld-linked executables validate just fine on Windows 7 as well as 10.
I have no idea why this happens, though I speculate that if Windows is depending on the linker-version field at all then it's probably using it as a trigger to enable or disable particular bug workarounds (and making the unwarranted assumption that only one linker exists). But regardless of the reason, I think it would be more useful if lld-link wrote a value into that field that makes this use case do the right thing.
Does that sound reasonable? If so, I'll prepare a patch. (Though I'm not sure whether I should do th...
2019 Apr 24
1
Bug in "stats4" package - "confint" method
...In particular, when some ?fixed? parameters define the log likelihood, these parameters are stored within the mle object but they are not used by the ?confint" method, which retrieves their value from the global environment (whenever they still exist).
Sample code:
> ## Avoid printing to unwarranted accuracy
> od <- options(digits = 5)
> x <- 0:10
> y <- c(26, 17, 13, 12, 20, 5, 9, 8, 5, 4, 8)
>
> ## Easy one-dimensional MLE:
> nLL <- function(lambda, y) -sum(stats::dpois(y, lambda, log = TRUE))
> fit0 <- mle(nLL, start = list(lambda = 5), fixed=list(y=y),...
2015 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...is approach for a number of reasons:
>>
>> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
>> 2) The pdb reading code relies very heavily on Windows APIs, and will not compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake machinery, but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>>
>> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code in lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm accordingly.
>>
>> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
>> Zach
-------------- next part -----...
2015 Jan 29
2
[LLVMdev] Adding PDB support to lib\DebugInfo
...39;t like this approach for a number of reasons:
>
> 1) Not every consumer of DebugInfo wants both types of DebugInfo.
> 2) The pdb reading code relies very heavily on Windows APIs, and will not compile on other platforms. This is solvable with some CMake machinery, but it's ugly and unwarranted in my opinion.
>
> So as a first step in this direction I'd like to propose moving the code in lib/DebugInfo to lib/DebugInfo/dwarf, and then updating the rest of llvm accordingly.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
>
> Sounds good. Naming bikeshed:
>
Sounds general...
2005 May 05
2
CNAM lookup: new method for Caller ID Name delivery
...nable enough. I'm sure better price breaks come with volume.
Upsides:
1) They have direct Asterisk integration, using app_getcname.c as a
data method.
2) They at least are willing to talk to smaller customers who
aren't pushing millions of calls a month.
3) It's all IP - no unwarranted complexity of SS7 or other signalling.
Downsides:
1) They want you to sign an NDA before they'll discuss the methods
with you. I was not willing to sign an NDA to have an XML schema
example transmitted to me, so that was a non-starter. This really
angers me, actually - does anyone actu...
2006 Feb 07
2
Browser Detection
How can I detect the user''s browser in Rails?
Thanks.