On 2015-03-17 at 13:44, John Snow wrote:
On 03/17/2015 01:28 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-17 at 13:21, John Snow wrote:
On 03/17/2015 10:53 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-13 at 14:30, John Snow wrote:
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncati
On 03/17/2015 01:28 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-17 at 13:21, John Snow wrote:
On 03/17/2015 10:53 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-13 at 14:30, John Snow wrote:
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncating and ensure that everything appears to
h
On 2015-03-17 at 13:21, John Snow wrote:
On 03/17/2015 10:53 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-13 at 14:30, John Snow wrote:
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncating and ensure that everything appears to
have gone OK.
We test growing and shrinking
On 03/17/2015 10:53 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-13 at 14:30, John Snow wrote:
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncating and ensure that everything appears to
have gone OK.
We test growing and shrinking by different amounts:
- Less than the gran
On 2015-03-13 at 14:30, John Snow wrote:
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncating and ensure that everything appears to
have gone OK.
We test growing and shrinking by different amounts:
- Less than the granularity
- Less than the granularity, but acr
The general approach is to set bits close to the boundaries of
where we are truncating and ensure that everything appears to
have gone OK.
We test growing and shrinking by different amounts:
- Less than the granularity
- Less than the granularity, but across a boundary
- Less than sizeof(unsigned
