similar to: Buffering

>>> strongly disagree. I'm appalled to see that sentence here. >> > >> > Come on! >> > >>> >> The overhead is significant for any large vector and it is in particular unnecessary since in .C you have to allocate*and copy* space even for results (twice!). Also it is very error-prone, because you have no information about the length of

Hello. I''m the author of DataMapper (http://datamapper.org), and am trying to choose what Full-Text-Indexing engine/plugin I want to include by default. I was hoping you guys could help. :-) Sphinx comes highly recommended, but without live index updates, it just doesn''t seem practical for most of my work. I''m most experienced with Solr, but the whole HTTP::Request and

* Ubuntu 12.04 Precise * NUT 2.6 * From Ubuntu terminal ---> sudo apt-get install nut * Openups from mini-box.com (http://www.mini-box.com/OpenUPS) * - Intelligent UPS, USB interface - SMBUS slave and I2C master - Input 6-34V - Programable output 6-24V - Default output is 12V - Input/Output current 6A/10A peak - Charge between 6-30V, 3A - Voltage and current limits - Li-Ion, Li-Po,

Hello, I'm finding problems with BackEdgeTaken count calculation in even simple fortran loops with gfortran-4.6 + DragonEgg 3.0. Even for simple double loops like this one: program test2 integer i,j,k dimension k(100,100) do j=1,100 do i=1,100 k(i,j) = i enddo enddo write(*,*) k(1,30) end make the ScalarEvolution

Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution tests in LLVM): diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp index daf7742..b10fab2 100644 --- a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp +++ b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp @@ -4293,9 +4293,15 @@

Your patch should include a testcase, see test/Analysis/ScalarEvolution for examples. "BranchInst* " should be "BranchInst *". You should have spaces after the // in your comments. One of the comment lines isn't indented properly. Nick On 8 February 2012 12:05, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote: > Attached > > 2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni

although basically hopeful of the company''s ''rough cuts'' venture, i am insulted by the fact that o''reilly''s safari service offers important material to its regular subscribers only if they pay extra for it. o''reilly''s material on ajax is a good example: all of the introductory coverage is available only as pricey ''rough

On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 15:51 -0500, Alexander Lopez wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steve Murphy [mailto:murf at digium.com] > > Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 1:59 PM > > To: Alexander Lopez > > Subject: RE: [asterisk-dev] 1.4 and CDRs -- The Breaking Point > > > > On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 12:28 -0500, Alexander Lopez wrote: >

Attached 2012/2/8 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > Mmm, sorry, the patch I posted crashes if ExitBr is null (which it may > be ...) , this one should be ok (and passess all the ScalarEvolution > tests in LLVM): > > diff --git a/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp b/lib/Analysis/ScalarEvolution.cpp > index daf7742..b10fab2 100644 > ---

On 8 February 2012 15:50, Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com> wrote: > Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more > as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid > solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up > the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion. > I'm

On 3 February 2015 at 10:31, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > If testing then a one character password is very acceptable to me. Why > should some arrogant nutter impose an arduous ultra secure password when > a simple one character password will suffice ? Who knows the machine, > the deploying environment and the circumstances better ? The user or > some

Well, it wasn't intended as a "real" patch to be included , but more as a "proof of concept" for a solution. Do you think it is a valid solution and I'm correct in my assumption? If so then I'll clean up the patch and attach a testcase for inclusion. Thanks! Marcello 2012/2/9 Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com>: > Your patch should include a testcase,

This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the problem (attached) Also a more conforming patch has been attached 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what > you are saying. > This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block > doesn't have a unique predecessor,

Jeff Van Dyke's "Public Key Assistant subsystem" was previously discussed here: (end of a short thread) http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=103436908422003&w=2 I do see a few comments that seem to point out his arrogance and some disgust about OpenBSD's RCSID, but has anybody found it to be unsecure or if it was bug ridden. The subject sorta dies right

FInally I had the time to complete everything up. Now I included the test case in the patch and the testcase runs with the LLVM tests system. 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms at gmail.com>: > This is instead a very simple (handmade) test case that triggers the > problem (attached) > Also a more conforming patch has been attached > > 2012/2/9 Marcello Maggioni <hayarms

This is the .ll for that graph (attached). I think I understand what you are saying. This particular testcase returns CNC not because the exit block doesn't have a unique predecessor, but because the unique predecessor (the inner loop block) has a successor that is inside the loop (in this case itself, because it's the inner loop block). That doesn't change, anyway, the assuption that

I have an updated tripwire port which I'd like to release for testing prior to replacing the existing and currently broken tripwire port. I've tested it under the upcoming 6.1, which it seems to work well in my test environment and will commence testing under 4.11-STABLE, the upcoming 5.5, and 7.0-CURRENT. The things that are on my todo list are: - Fully test under 4.11-STABLE. -

I will be updating the KRB5 port shortly. The updated port, as it stands right now, builds and installs cleanly on the i386 version of 6.0. I need to verify it builds and installs on 5.4, 4.11, and 7.0-CURRENT (my "checkout" of 7.0 as of three days ago currently doesn't build here). I should have the upgraded port committed sometime during the weekend. Cheers, Cy Schubert

While the ports freeze is still in effect, I have a new MIT KRB5-1.4 port ready for commit. Anyone willing to use this preview version of the port or test it is welcome to use it. I've put it at http://komquats.com/ports/krb5- 1.4.tar.bz2. If you have any problems or issues with it, just send me an email. Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> Web: http://www.komquats.com

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=616 --- Comment #8 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-09 15:56:45 CEST --- (In reply to comment #7) > It is the duty of the software to properly execute that policy. Here, the > software fails to do so because it produces duplicate redundant rules which are > never used. And where is it documented that the software