* Jim Ursetto zbignie...@gmail.com [130316 23:55]:
I don't believe that will work; the list check must be done
inside the loop. Otherwise this will crash:
True.
--
In the world, there is nothing more submissive and weak than
water. Yet for attacking that which is hard and strong, nothing can
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:32:57PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
In fact assuming a stack corruption would explain it at least.
Especially since I'm observing various strange error messages
since I updated to chicken 4.8.2.
Does it happen often enough to perform a git bisect to track down
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 09:20:28AM +0100, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
In ##sys#read, for \0xx report invalid escape-sequence '\0xx' instead of
invalid escape-sequence '\xx'.
Attached is a slightly simplified patch (use the 'c' variable everywhere,
instead of repeating the character from the case).
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 01:56:23PM +0100, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
Florian, I'd really appreciate it if you could attach your patches
instead of putting them inline in your mail. Your patches are the
only ones that are different, breaking the standard workflow I use
when dealing with
On Mar 17 2013, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
Somehow, this feels to me like you are applying test driven development
techniques to concurrency correctness. Are you sure that your reasoning is
correct and reliable and future-proof? Are the assumptions you make about
the compiler true now for sure and
Hi,
Would what git format-patch's --attach produces help you? Not sure whether
that actually would work with my workflow, but I could try it ...
I don't know what that will do, but maybe you can give it a try on your
next patch. As long as it produces an email that looks like everyone
On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:58 AM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
If you cannot be sufficiently sure
that your approach is correct to be willing to build a full fix on it
without testing first, I would consider that a sign that the approach is
too fragile to rely on, at least without a good reason.
I
Hello!
I have noticed that recently there has been some confusion about the
correct way to submit patches to this mailing list, so I hope it helps
clarifying the situation when I give, to the best of my knowledge, our
preferred format here:
Patches are best produced with git(1)'s format-patch
Felix scripsit:
This leaves the decision to inline to the compiler
Excellent. However, I hope that notinline forces the compiler never
to inline, for the reasons I gave before. Is that now the case?
--
John Cowan co...@ccil.org http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Awk! sed Grep. A fscking
