what I have in /sys/src/cmd/cc here is identical to what's on 9p.io.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 7:23 PM Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 09:20:43PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 8:36 PM Kurt H Maier wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:26:30PM -0400, Jeremy
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 09:20:43PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 8:36 PM Kurt H Maier wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:26:30PM -0400, Jeremy O'Brien wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 11:33, Kyohei Kadota wrote:
> > > > Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
> > > >
> > > > About
It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
"the rest is just scripting".
One caveat I have: Git's index file format is a bit
boneheaded, so I'm ignoring it. The index
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 11:33, Kyohei Kadota wrote:
> Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
>
> About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to
> zero but the value of flags was a garbage, ex, "f8f7".
> Is this expected?
>
> ```
> #include
>
> struct option {
> int n;
> char
Yes, that's normal C behaviour. Only external and static storage is
guaranteed to be zero. In a modern environment it seems a little mean,
especially since you gave opt a partial initial value, but there are no
half-measures in C.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 01:27, Jeremy O'Brien wrote:
> On Mon, Apr
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:26:30PM -0400, Jeremy O'Brien wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 11:33, Kyohei Kadota wrote:
> > Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
> >
> > About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to
> > zero but the value of flags was a garbage, ex, "f8f7".
> > Is this
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 8:36 PM Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:26:30PM -0400, Jeremy O'Brien wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 11:33, Kyohei Kadota wrote:
> > > Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
> > >
> > > About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to
> > > zero
Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to
zero but the value of flags was a garbage, ex, "f8f7".
Is this expected?
```
#include
struct option {
int n;
char *s;
int flags;
};
int
main(void)
{
struct option opt = {1, "test"};
perhaps you mean that if you bind a lot you have to walk a lot :)
I remember hearing of some disadvantage to walking directories, but can't
remember what it was. Could someone remind me, please? Perhaps there was more
than one, of course. Perhaps a performance trick couldn't be employed?
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 5:27 PM, hiro wrote:
> perhaps you mean that if you bind a lot you have to walk a lot :)
If that's the only issue, I'll be happy. :)
On Mon, 4/1/19, Ethan Gardener wrote:
> I remember hearing of some disadvantage to
> walking directories, but can't remember what it was.
> Could someone remind me, please? Perhaps there was
> more than one, of course. Perhaps a performance trick
> couldn't be employed?
The only complaint
It should initialize to zero. 8c and 5c both do the right thing here.
Which distribution and cputype?
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 8:34 AM Kyohei Kadota wrote:
> Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy.
>
> About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to
> zero but the value of flags was a
13 matches
Mail list logo