Thanks for the comments i could put the hardcoded values into registry
keys if you are really interested in the patch, i know hardcoding is not
an good practice but i made the patch to suit my needs and published it
later for the community, not pretending it was ok, but i tested it with
many game a
Op 31-12-12 20:01, Andrew Eikum schreef:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 07:03:31PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Op 31-12-12 17:59, Andrew Eikum schreef:
>>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 01:24:03AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
+ if(!maxq){
+ /* nothing to do! */
+ Le
On Jan 1, 2013, at 4:36 PM, Per Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Per Johansson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Charles Davis wrote:
>>>
>>> The right thing IMO is to test if we're compiling with Clang. If we are,
>>> then we should test if Clang is using its integr
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Per Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Charles Davis wrote:
>>
>> The right thing IMO is to test if we're compiling with Clang. If we are,
>> then we should test if Clang is using its integrated assembler; if it is,
>> then we should invoke Clang
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Charles Davis wrote:
>
> The right thing IMO is to test if we're compiling with Clang. If we are, then
> we should test if Clang is using its integrated assembler; if it is, then we
> should invoke Clang instead of the system assembler to assemble. This way,
> th
On Jan 1, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Per Johansson wrote:
> Needed to build with clang on OS X, the normal as program can't parse clang
> output.
> It's a configure option since llvm-mc takes different options than the normal
> assembler, and on OS X is most often installed by a different name
> (llvm-mc-
Op 31-12-12 17:59, Andrew Eikum schreef:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 01:24:03AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> +if(!maxq){
>> +/* nothing to do! */
>> +LeaveCriticalSection(&device->mixlock);
>> +return;
>> }
> This was removed in 8ba4090fc304993. It b
