search for: exex

...und. Error in fun(...) : Could not load the rggobi library - please ensure GGobi is on the library path Error : .onLoad failed in 'loadNamespace' for 'rggobi' Error: package 'rggobi' could not be loaded Eventually an error-message window popped up reading: "RGui: RGui.exex - Uable To Locate Component This application failed to start because libggobi-0.dll was not found. Re-installig the aplication may fix this problem" Any idea what is going on ? Thank you in advance. Maura -- Maura E.M [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...39;s hard to say much without seeing the specific IR and the code > generated from that IR. > > -Eli Our language can do either: 1) DSL ==> C/C++ ===> clang/gcc ===> exec code or 1) DSL ==> LLVM IR ===> (optimisation passes) ==> LLVM IR ==> LLVM JIT ==> exex code 1) and 2) where running at same speed with LLVM 3.1, but 2) is now slower with LLVM 3.3 I compared the LLVM IR that is generated by the 2) chain *after* the optimization passes, with the one that is generated with 1) and clang -emit-llvm -03 with the pure C input. The two are the same. So m...

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at grame.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > Our DSL LLVM IR emitted code (optimized with -O3 kind of IR ==> IR passes) runs slower when executed with the LLVM 3.3 JIT, compared to what we had with LLVM 3.1. What could be the reason? > > I tried to play with TargetOptions without any success… > > Here is the kind of code we use to

Hi, Our DSL LLVM IR emitted code (optimized with -O3 kind of IR ==> IR passes) runs slower when executed with the LLVM 3.3 JIT, compared to what we had with LLVM 3.1. What could be the reason? I tried to play with TargetOptions without any success… Here is the kind of code we use to allocate the JIT: EngineBuilder builder(fResult->fModule);

...9;s hard to say much without seeing the specific IR and the code > generated from that IR. > > -Eli Our language can do either: 1) DSL ==> C/C++ ===> clang/gcc ===> exec code or 1) DSL ==> LLVM IR ===> (optimisation passes) ==> LLVM IR ==> LLVM JIT ==> exex code 1) and 2) where running at same speed with LLVM 3.1, but 2) is now slower with LLVM 3.3 I compared the LLVM IR that is generated by the 2) chain *after* the optimization passes, with the one that is generated with 1) and clang -emit-llvm -03 with the pure C input. The two are the same. So m...