Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Anthony J. Bentley
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff writes: I believe it is not actively developed for several years, and it seems to have lost its momentum. It's certainly not active, but neither is it completely dead. Actually, they just branched a new release beta. http://marc.info/?l=pcc-listm=141612991809812w=2 Another

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread koneu
On November 24, 2014 6:35:51 AM CET, Markus Wichmann nullp...@gmx.net wrote: that this asumption removes most overflow checking code. This behaviour is a pro, not a con, of GCC. If you rely on undefined behaviour to check for ... well ... undefined behaviour there is a compiler flag to enable

Re: [dev] [dwm][PATCH] added support for _NET_SUPPORTING_WM_CHECK

2014-11-24 Thread Quentin Rameau
Hi, Hi Anselm, Are you sure this hint requires to be set on both, the client win and the root win? This looks very odd to me. I'm sure about that yes [1]. What I'm not sure about, though, is on which window it has to be set. Should it be set (as I did) on the current focused window, or on a

Re: [dev] suckless assembly at 31C3

2014-11-24 Thread younix
Hello, There may be 4 till 6 people at the suckless assembly. I created an assembly for us. If there are more people out there, just come, meet and hack with us. If you want to stay longer please create an wiki accout at the 31C3-Wiki and set you assembly status to ours. So I could adopt the

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Joerg Jung
Am 24.11.2014 um 09:44 schrieb Anthony J. Bentley anth...@cathet.us: Dmitrij D. Czarkoff writes: I believe it is not actively developed for several years, and it seems to have lost its momentum. It's certainly not active, but neither is it completely dead. Actually, they just branched

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Dimitris Papastamos
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:03:04PM +0100, Joerg Jung wrote: I can add subc[1] and cc500[2] to the list of interesting projects. [1] http://www.t3x.org/subc/ [2] http://homepage.ntlworld.com/edmund.grimley-evans/cc500/ +1 for subc. His book is excellent as well.

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread v4hn
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:20:44PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote: Hi, What is the situation of GCC, is it bloated? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:35:52PM +, doa379 wrote: There's an incredible amount of spam and OT on this list isn't there! Indeed. v4hn pgpxKlkM6DhL4.pgp Description:

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Calvin Morrison
On 24 November 2014 at 11:42, v4hn m...@v4hn.de wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:20:44PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote: Hi, What is the situation of GCC, is it bloated? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:35:52PM +, doa379 wrote: There's an incredible amount of spam and OT on this list

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Markus Wichmann
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:01:13AM +0100, koneu wrote: On November 24, 2014 6:35:51 AM CET, Markus Wichmann nullp...@gmx.net wrote: that this asumption removes most overflow checking code. This behaviour is a pro, not a con, of GCC. If you rely on undefined behaviour to check for ... well

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread FRIGN
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:05:29 +0100 Markus Wichmann nullp...@gmx.net wrote: But no, so I'll have to put in debug outputs, which of course changes the program, and kills the timing, and if I'm debugging a race condition (in the sucky code I have to write at work) that's exactly what I don't

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread koneu
Greetings. Markus Wichmann wrote: compiling with -O3 will result in some broken binaries. Somewhere. Why? Because -O3 is very aggressive and should NOT be used. Especially not when compiling/bootstrapping a system. In most cases it makes things buggier and bigger, in some cases even slower. Use

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Calvin Morrison
On 24 November 2014 at 15:44, koneu kone...@googlemail.com wrote: Greetings. Markus Wichmann wrote: compiling with -O3 will result in some broken binaries. Somewhere. Why? Because -O3 is very aggressive and should NOT be used. Especially not when compiling/bootstrapping a system. In most

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread Calvin Morrison
On 24 November 2014 at 15:46, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 November 2014 at 15:44, koneu kone...@googlemail.com wrote: Greetings. Markus Wichmann wrote: compiling with -O3 will result in some broken binaries. Somewhere. Why? Because -O3 is very aggressive and should

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread Henrique Lengler
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 09:01:07PM -0500, Greg Reagle wrote: I use extension DownloadHelper for Firefox then play movie file with mplayer. You can also inspect the source of the HTML page as the full URL of the video is often there (usually ends with .mp4 or .flv). Many video players will

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread Alexander Hof
Henrique Lengler wrote: Thank you guys, but I'm looking for something automatic. Looks like it doesn't exist but would be cool to have something like this. Also I don't care about youtube videos or any other type of video system that doesn't provide their videos as video files, I think this

Re: [dev] GCC situation

2014-11-24 Thread koneu
Greetings. Calvin Morrison wrote: I've used -O3 for a long time in several projects that are heavily tuned and not noticed any issues. I think there is a large stigma around -O3 but if you just take a few minutes to read about -O3 you'll learn quickly what is safe to use and what could cause

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread hiro
use the filth web browser, that one will run mplayer for all html5 video.

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread hiro
use the filth player, that one will run mplayer for all html5 video.

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread Henrique Lengler
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:31:30PM +0100, hiro wrote: use the filth web browser, that one will run mplayer for all html5 video. I can't find anything related to filth web browser on google. Regards, -- Henrique Lengler

[dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Charlie Kester
On Mon 24 Nov 2014 at 12:47:30 PDT Calvin Morrison wrote: On 24 November 2014 at 11:42, v4hn m...@v4hn.de wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:20:44PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote: Hi, What is the situation of GCC, is it bloated? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:35:52PM +, doa379 wrote:

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Calvin Morrison
On 24 November 2014 at 17:10, Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote: On Mon 24 Nov 2014 at 12:47:30 PDT Calvin Morrison wrote: On 24 November 2014 at 11:42, v4hn m...@v4hn.de wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:20:44PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote: Hi, What is the situation of GCC,

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Nick
Quoth Charlie Kester: If there are enough people who want to keep this dev list restricted to discussion of proposed patches or other concrete work on suckless projects, perhaps there should be a separate list for more general discussion? No, I think most people here like the mixture of more

Re: [dev] [surf] web videos idea

2014-11-24 Thread hiro
sorry, third attempt: fifth browser

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread hiro
I think most of these threads could be avoided if we make the creation of new threads cost money.

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Calvin Morrison
On 24 November 2014 at 18:35, hiro 23h...@gmail.com wrote: I think most of these threads could be avoided if we make the creation of new threads cost money. I think we can just simplify it even more, why just reuse one thread for all conversations?

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Dimitris Papastamos
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23:03PM +, Nick wrote: Quoth Charlie Kester: If there are enough people who want to keep this dev list restricted to discussion of proposed patches or other concrete work on suckless projects, perhaps there should be a separate list for more general

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Ivan Delalande
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:56:41PM +, Dimitris Papastamos wrote: I'd personally prefer to have a low volume list full of patches that are yet to be merged than a list intermixed with random _non-technical_ discussion about compilers, distros, tmux vs dvtm and other such mostly boring stuff.

Re: [dev] Does suckless need a separate list for general discussion?

2014-11-24 Thread Anselm R Garbe
On 24 November 2014 at 23:10, Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote: On Mon 24 Nov 2014 at 12:47:30 PDT Calvin Morrison wrote: On 24 November 2014 at 11:42, v4hn m...@v4hn.de wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:20:44PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote: What is the situation of GCC, is it