[#3358] Fwd: fastcgi & continuations (Re: Idea: Webshare) — Patrick May <patrick@...>
Hello,
8 messages
2004/09/09
[#3359] Re: Fwd: fastcgi & continuations (Re: Idea: Webshare)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2004/09/09
Patrick May (patrick@hexane.org) wrote:
[#3419] Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
Hello list,
19 messages
2004/09/17
[#3422] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3423] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:01, ts wrote:
[#3424] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3425] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:37, ts wrote:
[#3426] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3428] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:05, ts wrote:
[#3429] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3430] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:30, ts wrote:
[#3431] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— ts <decoux@...>
2004/09/17
>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:
[#3432] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:50, ts wrote:
[#3433] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
There is a minor flaw in my analysis toward the end; ignore previous email
[#3434] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
2004/09/17
On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:50, ts wrote:
[#3437] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2004/09/17
Hi,
Re: [PATCH] dir.c --- Dir.chdir error handling
From:
"H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
Date:
2004-09-13 16:21:07 UTC
List:
ruby-core #3390
nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
(2004/09/14 01:07)
>Hi,
>
>At Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:54:06 +0900,
>H.Yamamoto wrote in [ruby-core:03384]:
>> Probably former because there is difference in type of arguments
>> between prototype and implementation.
>> (Maybe this is allowed in C, but I could not find document to confirm.
>> At least C++ fails.)
>
>The latter. VALUEs are not pointers, so difference in
>qualifiers is OK, even in C++. Actually, it is disallowed only
>when the dereferenced qualifiers conflict.
Umm, my bcc32 may be broken.
// f.cpp
extern int foo(int);
int main()
{
return foo(32);
}
// g.cpp
int foo(volatile int x)
{
x;
return x;
}
// result
R:\>g++ f.cpp g.cpp -o f.exe
R:\>bcc32 f.cpp g.cpp
Borland C++ 5.5.1 for Win32 Copyright (c) 1993, 2000 Borland
f.cpp:
g.cpp:
Turbo Incremental Link 5.00 Copyright (c) 1997, 2000 Borland
Error: 外部シンボル 'foo(int)' が未解決(R:\F.OBJ が参照)