search for: wagering

On 12/01/2018 05:49 PM, Ralph Seichter wrote: > * Michael A. Peters: > >> Netiquette posts are just someone's opinion, and they often don't take >> into account the vastly different way different types of minds work. > > Mailing list netiquette has been around for decades, for good reasons. > If Joe User's mind "works differently", Joe needs to

Any simple way to take a (2D) table and 'rotate' it so all the rows become columns and the columns rows? I'll wager there is a simple way ;) - but I can't find it :(

On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 18:15, Min-Yih Hsu via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > David mentioned in D87337 that LLVM has used similar techniques on code > size (not sure what he was referencing, my guess will be something related > to hot-cold code splitting). > IIUC, it's just using optsize instead of optnone. The idea is that, if the code really doesn't

I'm currently developing several tools in R that I'd like to deploy for use by multiple analysts in my research group. Many of the analysts have no background in using R (but have plenty of experience with SAS), so part of my effort will be in training them to use the new tools. Some of the analyses will be too computationally intensive for our regulation 32 bit Windows desktops, however

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 7:02 AM Jeremy Morse <jeremy.morse.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 8:38 PM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > As far as LLVM semantics are concerned, the implicit pointer doesn't > seem to be that much different from any other implicit values (such as > constants) to me. Why do you think that it

Hello, #define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1) // switch like char * b(int e) { if (likely(e == 0)) return "0"; else if (e == 1) return "1"; else return "f"; } GCC correctly prefers the first case: b(int): mov eax, OFFSET FLAT:.LC0 test edi, edi jne .L7 ret But Clang seems to ignore _builtin_expect hints in this case.

I am using observe_field on a number of multi-selects and checkbox form elements whose values would normally come in as arrays on a normal (non-Ajax) form post. I understand that by using the :with => ''name'' I will get name=value in the request.raw_post however if the field I am submitting has mutliple values and the name is of the form ''name[]'', I get

On Wed, 2019-07-31 at 09:32 -0400, John Chludzinski wrote: > After finally completing and trying to reboot, the machine goes into > "Emergency Mode" and asks that I log in as root. That fails and the machine > becomes completely unresponsive. > > I tried the minimum install and got the same result. > Try booting from a live CD to see if that gives you any info. TBH

On 12/01/2018 05:00 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > There's an extensive email etiquette post somewhere on the net > explaining why setting 'reply-to' to the list is a bad idea. > > Reply-to is intended for the sender to explain that replies shouldn't > be sent to the obvious sending address, but to another address. > This is essential if, say, the sender is

On 02/12/2018 03:05, Michael A. Peters wrote: [...] > But - I would wager that over 95% of the time when someone hits the > reply button on a list post, their intent is to reply to the list. Even if it's 99%: What is the lesser risk if someone get's it wrong? Apart from the situation that people send mails over the mailing list with "for X.Y." in the subject and no one

FYI David is referring to PGSO (profile-guided size optimization) as it exists directly under that name, see: https://reviews.llvm.org/D67120. And yeah using PGSO is selecting optsize while this change is selecting optnone. On 9/9/20, 10:58 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Tobias Hieta via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on

I did https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37368 2018-05-09 20:33 GMT+02:00 Dávid Bolvanský <david.bolvansky at gmail.com>: > I did > > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37368 > > 2018-05-09 20:29 GMT+02:00 David Zarzycki <dave at znu.io>: > >> I’d wager that the if-else chain is being converted to a "switch >> statement” during an optimization

On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 03:58:53AM +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > On 02/12/2018 03:05, Michael A. Peters wrote: > [...] > > But - I would wager that over 95% of the time when someone hits the > > reply button on a list post, their intent is to reply to the list. > > Even if it's 99%: What is the lesser risk if someone get's it wrong? > > Apart from the

Hey All, I am looking for an example of the proper config settings for background rb to run my rails app and my backgroundrb instance on separate machines (or more precisely, to have a rails cluster with one backgroundrb machine). Does anyone have such examples? Thanks! -Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

> On 2/24/19 9:01 PM, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: >> I tried to delete the MDX, I removed the disks by failing them, then >> removing each array md0, md1 and md2. >> I also did >> >> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdX bs=512 seek=$(($(blockdev --getsz >> /dev/sdX)-1024)) count=1024 > > > Clearing the initial sectors doesn't do anything to clear the

Hello, i use successfully mysql-quotasystem with dovecot 1.2.11 on different servers except for mysql 4.0 servers dovecot internally uses sql: "ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE" which was introduced in mysql 4.1 Is there a chance to make this statement mysql 4.0 compatible or should i update mysql? i want to avoid updating mysql because some old software is running which is not compatible to

Hello-- I've been making note of a local situation that seems somewhat irritating, and thought maybe some of you experts out there, might be able to propose some alternatives. The situation goes like this: Rural Wyoming. Cody, to be exact, but I'd wager that you could almost anywhere in Wyoming and find similar situations. The county gov. phones and the school system phones do not

Hi Dávid, Looks like you can defeat the switch conversion by adding a dummy asm(“”): #define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1) // switch like char * b(int e) { if (likely(e == 0)) return "0"; asm(""); if (e == 1) return "1"; else return "f"; } Dave > On May 9, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Dávid Bolvanský via llvm-dev

On Mar 14, 2005, at 5:28 PM, Dan Stowell wrote: > I don't want to pour water on this idea since a nice installer would > be helpful for the "less-techy" (had to climb a pretty steep learning > curve myself...). no worries. These are just observations. > But I do want to point out that both "fink" and "darwinports" provide > nice ways to install

Hi all, I''m just starting to look at using Augeas with Puppet to manage some of our configuration files. I thought I would start with a simple task of removing an entry from the /etc/hosts file. I''m not finding it simple though! We have a number of hosts with entries in the /etc/hosts file like this: 127.0.1.1 hostname We would like to remove these lines. Now I know this can