Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org!lev@agora.rdrop.com wrote:
I'm not sure, should BSD port behaves as Linux or as
Solaris one.
Based solely on heritage, I suspect the Solaris approach might
fit more comfortably. Solaris comes from SVR4, which was supposed
to be the great reunification of
Kostik Belousov yazmış:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 07:48:47PM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov yazm??:
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:28:51PM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov yazm??:
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 08:33:03AM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 01:35:00PM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov yazm??:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 07:48:47PM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov yazm??:
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:28:51PM +0300, Ali Polatel wrote:
Kostik Belousov yazm??:
On Sun, May 09, 2010
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:42:26AM -0700, Evan Geller wrote:
I'm a bit confused how recursion in the UVA works. vm_map_entries are
allocated from a vm_map_entry zone, but if the vm_map_entry slabs are
full and it needs to allocate a vm_map_entry to satisfy the mapping,
there would seem to be a
Le Mon, 10 May 2010 08:26:08 -0700,
Sam Leffler s...@errno.com a écrit :
Hello,
I noticed several things in hifn, if you want to look:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/130286
IMHO some locks are missing in the use of sc-sc_sessions (the array
containing the sessions) :
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
I'm proting some application from Linux, which discover its stack bounds by
reading and pasing /proc/self/maps. FreeBSD have /prov/curproc/map, but
I can not find how to determine which record is for stack (I've looked into
implementation of
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:23:41PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
I'm proting some application from Linux, which discover its stack bounds
by reading and pasing /proc/self/maps. FreeBSD have
/prov/curproc/map, but I can not find how to
My proposal is simple:
require that any if statement that compares a constant to a mutable variable
be written as
if (constant == variable)
instead of
if (variable == constant)
this prevents an extremely common programming error
if (variable = constant)
While this is almost always found in
On Tuesday 11 May 2010 21:36:11 Eitan Adler wrote:
My proposal is simple:
require that any if statement that compares a constant to a mutable
variable be written as
if (constant == variable)
instead of
if (variable == constant)
this prevents an extremely common programming error
if
With proper -W flags, if (var = const) also yields a warning:
warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
Chaning style(9) in such a fundamental way almost, always isn't a good idea.
It's simply unrealistic to change all current code to comply and the
difference
In my humble opinion,
With proper -W flags (i.e. -Wall -Werror), the compilation will fail on
if (var = const)
also yoda statements of the kind
if (constant == variable)
obfuscate code and make it more difficult to read, definately not a
good idea IMHO, added the confusion between old and new
11 matches
Mail list logo
