search for: wishi

On Oct 13, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > I actually have a particular allergy to member variable names and function names having similar styles: > > bool x = i->isMyConditionTrue; > > Did I mean to write 'isMyConditionTrue()'? Or 'bool &x = I->isMyConditionTrue'? Or something else? I have no idea. Warnings and

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > >> On Oct 13, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> >> wrote: >> > I actually have a particular allergy to member variable names and >> function names having

On 11/21/18 12:41 PM, Nicolai Hähnle wrote: > On 20.11.18 16:38, Stephen Canon via llvm-dev wrote: >> Distribution doesn’t seem to be used by many transforms at present. >> My vague recollection is that the fast math flags didn’t do a great >> job of characterizing when it would be allowed, and using it >> aggressively broke a lot of code in practice (code which was

Dear LLVM developers, I have a question on the fast-math floating-point optimizations applied by LLVM: Judging by the documentation at https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#fast-math-flags I understood that rewriting with associativity and using reciprocal computations are possible optimizations. As the folklore description of fast-math is that it "applies real-valued identities", I

On May 2, 2008, at 2:23 PM, me22 wrote: [...] > I suppose the most important issue is what constitutes "observable > behavior". 1.9/6: «The observable behavior of the abstract machine is its sequence of reads and writes to volatile data and calls to library I/O functions. [ Footnote 6: An implementation can offer additional library I/O functions as an extension.

For lambdas, you have more contexts to confuse yourself, so why would a discriminator like '_' not be helpful here? David On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Xinliang David Li

> If we are going to change how we name variables, I very much want them to > not collide with either type names or function names. My suggestion would be > "lower_case" names. > > This also happens to be the vastly most common pattern across all C++ coding > styles and C-based language coding styles I have seen. STL has "lower_case" functions, and exposes

From: Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com> > I have a real problem with this thread. It seems as if, according to some, > someone can only be with or against Red Hat. Yes, that was my major complaint too. > I'm sure Red Hat has made stupid decisions, has adopted buggy software and > are responsible for some of the headaches people have had. And I'm sure > even Red Hat

On 30.11.18 11:49, Heiko Becker via llvm-dev wrote: > --Resending my last mail, as it might have gotten lost -- > > Thanks Nicolai and Steve for the initial replies. > > So if I understand correctly there are 2 places you can pinpoint at > where distributivity is used: > > - simplification of infinity/NaN expressions > > - combination with FMA introduction Well

I''m working on writing features for a wizard. The wizard collects information from a number of different forms, and you can navigate through it in a number of ways. Anyhow one of these forms is a customer form collecting name, and email. In the context of the wizard I feel that the following scenarios Scenario: Given I step to customer And I fill in my customer details

Where are we going? It's time to start thinking ahead and really figure out how to make Compiz survive, specially in lieu of Dennis' suggestion. The reality is that there has been the equivalent of no progress since the merge. We've basically only been in maintenance mode. The reason for this, from my point of view, is a complete lack of direction and leadership. We've