similar to: [LLVMdev] Emotional responses to feedback

Michael T. Richter wrote: > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > they just form the bulk of available documentation. I began my original message saying that I was providing "constructive criticism". That means I want to HELP if I can. Your sarcastic attitude is unprofessional. > The

Hi there LLVM is a great idea, congratulations. Do you mind if I give you a little bit of constructive criticism from the point of view of a developer who would like to use LLVM as a back-end? I will write this email from the point of view of MS Windows, but the same applies to MacOS and Linux. LLVM is difficult/awkward to use in a real-world environment/situation. To solve this problem,

Jon Harrop wrote: > Can you explain why you would like to generate DLLs on the > customer's computer rather than using LLVM as a JIT > compiler? Customers/clients unhappy with the inefficiency, extra CPU and RAM usage, and performance penalty of JIT. They require a faster, more efficient solution. The solution is to fully compile programs to native code at the time of

On 10/11/15 17:47, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:14:13AM +0100, buhorojo wrote: >> We don't think that is fair. We may not represent the views of the >> developers but we do feel that we are entitled to air our views >> here. We have support off-list, mainly from those who feel >> restricted in what they say here. Please do not use your power to

me22.ca wrote: > You said that if I have to install GCC, you might as well > just use it for everything. That statement very clearly > doesn't apply anymore, since it's binutils that's the > dependency. Or if you still stand by it, it means that > you consider GCC to also be "incomplete". How do I get the necessary binutils on Windoze? Install MinGW or

On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 16:30 +1000, kr512 wrote: > Michael T. Richter wrote: > > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > > they just form the bulk of available documentation. > I began my original message saying that I was providing > "constructive criticism". That means I want to

Dear Arc, I feel ashamed of the xiph community. I was always one standing up for the open audio-visual codecs and applications that were developed here and I felt part of that community by contributing. There have been an enormous number of people contributing to xiph specifications and software over the years. Your emails have been an insult to every contributor to xiph that is not in the

Jon Harrop wrote: > So LLVM has relatively poor support for Windows, no direct > support for DLL generation and the exact opposite of your > performance requirements. I see. This news is disappointing to me. > I appreciate that you have customer demands but those > demands are very unusual (and, frankly, absurd!) but you > must try to meet them regardless. Very unusual?

Chris Lattner wrote: > If you'd prefer to use GCC, go for it. No one is forcing > you to use LLVM. No, we would prefer to use LLVM, but a missing part in LLVM makes it difficult. It would be wonderful if this missing part could be supplied. > You are seriously ignorant of what LLVM is all about. > Please go inform yourself. Alright, I read some more on llvm.org and it

Hi Tristan, well... if speed is really his problem (and looking at those 72 MHz it probably is), wouldn't Speek surpass Opus by far? I agree that Opus is way better, but it's sadly also using more resources... But yeah, Richard you should give Opus a try if possible ;) It's generally easier to use then Speex and also more feature rich. Yours sincerely, Ren? Sch?mann *From:*

Hi, on my small Xen-virtualised server with 48 MiB RAM I use Postfix and Dovecot, because the Debian administrators dislike qmail [1], which is in my opinion despite some maintainability and code quality issues a quite well designed software, because it mostly follows the UNIX principles. Postfix is not able to sort my E-Mail into different Maildir folders and after I looked at procmail's

Hi All, I have no experience with VOIP or SIP, but I am a *nix networking admin for some years now and I would like to get into working with SIP etc... I have installed asterisk and configured it to run with 2 software phones. This works fine, and I can chat between 2 client machines in our office. Please can anyone point me to any documentation about how to use authentication to stop

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:14:13AM +0100, buhorojo wrote: > We don't think that is fair. We may not represent the views of the > developers but we do feel that we are entitled to air our views > here. We have support off-list, mainly from those who feel > restricted in what they say here. Please do not use your power to > restrict free speech. Criticism of this project is

On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 20:26 -0800, PatrickD Garvey wrote: > > The CentOS wiki pages found by a title page search are: > http://wiki.centos.org/HelpOnConfiguration/SecurityPolicy > http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Security > http://wiki.centos.org/Security > http://wiki.centos.org/Security/Heartbleed > http://wiki.centos.org/Security/POODLE >

Is there any consensus on what's the correct fix here? Jean-Marc On 06/11/14 04:26 PM, Cameron Gutman wrote: > Yeah that's the one. > > On Nov 6, 2014 1:23 PM, "Tristan Matthews" <le.businessman at gmail.com > <mailto:le.businessman at gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Cameron Gutman > <aicommander at gmail.com

Owen Anderson wrote: > There's nothing particularly stopping you from having your > installation package include copies of gas and ld, I disagree. gas and ld are not available on Windoze, except via MinGW. Yes I can make or tell my customers to install MinGW, but if MinGW is installed, then I don't need LLVM. (More about this further ahead) > You're welcome to think

Oh another thing, consider this question that some people will be asking: Why not use GCC to do what LLVM does, and skip the hassle of using LLVM entirely? ESPECIALLY considering that LLVM cannot be used without GCC. Even if you are using LLVM as a back-end only, for compiling LLVM bytecode only, GCC is still required to convert the "llc" output assembly .S file into a

Hi, In support of reproducible research at my Institute, I seek an approach to re-creating the R environments in which an analysis has been conducted. By which I mean, the exact version of R and the exact version of all packages used in a particular R session. I am seeking comments/criticism of this as a goal, and of the following outline of an approach: === When all the steps to an workflow

On 09/11/15 21:35, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 12:55:23PM +0100, buhorojo wrote: >>>>>> So could you please stop sabotaging these efforts? >>>> We are helping, not sabotaging. >>> We? .... Is that you ... steves? >> Eh? Plural. We work as a team. It works that way. > Ah. OK. Can we please remove the 'buhorojo' >

I am using Asterisk 16.30 inside Freepbx, with commercial modules, purchased from Sangoma and Symphony. After a few hours my memory usage reaches 900 GB, no kidding, in a box with 1 TB of RAM. The question is: how can I determine what is causing the memory leak? Can somebody send me instructions to find out what module is killing my box? FreePBX is 100% updated. Before I contact a vendor I need