similar to: Filesystem has Landed in Libc++

On Aug 10, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Marshall Clow via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > * The clock stuff being added in C++20 has already been discussed here. I’ve missed the discussions on file_time_type, however I thought I should throw in my opinion here before it is too late to do anything about it. I believe it is a mistake to model file_time_type with 128 bits. It

Hi, My current understanding of the problem (based on https://reviews.llvm.org/D49774) is that we have a type, file_time_type, which is part of the ABI and is currently defined as std::chrono::time_point<_FileSystemClock>, where _FileSystemClock is an internal type represented using a __int128_t. However, C++20 will add a type called file_clock and redefine file_time_type to be

Why did you want the symbols moved out of libc++experimental, and for the header to be moved from <experimental/filesystem> to <filesystem>? It certainly seems like it'd be safer and clearer to move them back to the old locations, but it's not clear to me if that'd be trading off something else of value. Was there some other greater purpose served by the change in

FWIW, I’d like for us to come to an agreement before the branch for LLVM 7.0 is cut. How do others feel about this? Am I wrong when I claim that shipping an ABI-unstable feature in the std:: namespace is a deviation from normal practice? Am I overcautious when I say it’s asking for trouble? Eric, I know you’re busy and may not have time to do the work so I’m totally willing to chime in, but I’d

All, I'm in the process of upgrading an LLVM client from using 3.8 to using 4.0 and am running into the following issue: // compile with: // clang++ -std=c++11 -Wno-c++14-extensions -S -emit-llvm // ~/chrono.cpp -o chrono.ll #include <chrono> #include <ratio> #include <thread> using namespace std; using namespace std::chrono; using tick = ratio<1, 300>; using

Sorry ... I missed mentioning the details - this is the error I get - root at no1slu398:~/Documents/LLVM/tmp# clang++ -std=c++0x hello.cpp In file included from hello.cpp:1: In file included from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.6/../../../../include/c++/4.6/thread:38: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.6/../../../../include/c++/4.6/chrono:535:6: error: no matching constructor for initialization of

Hi, I'd really appreciate some pointers in this regard. Regards, Kashyap On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:43 PM, C K Kashyap <ckkashyap at gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry ... I missed mentioning the details - > > this is the error I get - > > root at no1slu398:~/Documents/LLVM/tmp# clang++ -std=c++0x hello.cpp > In file included from hello.cpp:1: > In file included from >

On 15/10/13 22:22, C K Kashyap wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to try out the new c++11 features using clang. However, I am > running into some issue or the other on both Windows and Linux. In both > cases, it looks like the problem is due to headers from VC/g++. > I was wondering if someone can point me to some steps on setting up a > Windows or Linux(ubuntu 12.04 LTS) box for

Hi, I'd like to try out the new c++11 features using clang. However, I am running into some issue or the other on both Windows and Linux. In both cases, it looks like the problem is due to headers from VC/g++. I was wondering if someone can point me to some steps on setting up a Windows or Linux(ubuntu 12.04 LTS) box for exploring clang. I was able to successfully build clang on my ubuntu but

A while back llvm::format() was introduced that made it possible to combine printf-style formatting with llvm streams. However, this still comes with all the risks and pitfalls of printf. Everyone is no-doubt familiar with these problems, but here are just a few anyway: 1. *Not type-safe.* Not all compilers warn when you mess up the format specifier. And when you're writing your own

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I On Oct 11, 2016, at 6:22 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > A while back llvm::format() was introduced that made it possible to > combine printf-style formatting with llvm streams. However, this still > comes with all the risks

VS2013 support is dropped in about 1 week from now :) On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:37 PM Mueller-Roemer, Johannes Sebastian < Johannes.Sebastian.Mueller-Roemer at igd.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Visual Studio up to and including VS2013 implements > std::chrono::high_resolution_clock in an absolutely unusable manner (it is > a very low resolution clock…) [1]. Also, division is implemented

Hi all, We're considering using std::chrono more heavily in lldb. However, A quick search of the llvm, clang, and lld codebases shos almost zero usage of chrono. I wanted to see if this was for technical reasons (eg some compiler doesn't support it well) or simply because nobody has needed it yet. If it's the former then I'd like to be aware of the issues so we don't fall into

In some customer yes, but they are with LTSP (pxe boot) where another use graphical interface, but would rather have a web interface to change the password. This tambpem would be used for windows stations off the field. Em 10-05-2016 16:05, Rowland penny escreveu: > Not even on the clients ??

I dont know LTB or what it exact is, but Add in /etc/ldap/ldap.conf TLS_REQCERT allow Setup your own "rootCA" like this. ( if not done, apt-get install ca-certificates ) mkdir -p /usr/local/share/ca-certificates/chrono mv /etc/ssl/ca_chrono-dom.lan.pem /usr/local/share/ca-certificates/chrono update-ca-certificates ! MUST BE /usr/local/share/ca-certificates else its not picked up

Hi, I want an efficient way to implement function pow in LLVM instead of invoking pow() math built-in. For algorithm part, I am clear for the logic. But I am not quite sure for which parts of LLVM should I replace built-in pow with another efficient pow implementation. Any comments and feedback are appreciated. Thanks! -- Wei Ding -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Hello! You can now change the password for the User when even this expired password or "next logon"? PS: With the active account, was already working the password change. Hug. Em 11-05-2016 07:17, Charles-Henri Falconnet escreveu: > It works now for all my web apps ! > If you have a AC.pem, juste rename in AC.crt (update-ca-certificates > recognizes only crt files, man

On 9 Feb 2017, at 08:41, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > What isn’t clear to me still is : why shouldn't this be transitive? > In the example you’re showing, for a caller of f() in bar, what is the advantage of knowing that f() is nounwind if it an

Hi, Thanks for the quick reply again. > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and >> have the following test results to share. >> Summary below, full log at: >>

Thank you. > On Jul 3, 2019, at 4:04 AM, Justin Clift <justin at postgresql.org> wrote: > > On 2019-07-01 00:22, Marty Itzkowitz via llvm-dev wrote: >> I also tried spack install llvm at develop on a POWER9 (ppc641e) >> machine, but I can not find a compiler that >> will compile it. gcc 4.8.5 is reported as too old, and gcc 7.3.0 and >> 8.1.0 both fail in