search for: 0.0019

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

Thanks, that was a really helpful suggestion. If you're curious- here are some of the high cost areas: ===-------------------------------------------------------------------------=== DWARF Emission ===-------------------------------------------------------------------------=== Total Execution Time: 2.0117 seconds (2.0185 wall clock) ---User Time---

LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When

Hi all, Anyone experienced in the LaTeX format? I'm trying to use the xtable package to create nice anova tables, but how do I do to produce a pdf from the resulting LaTeX table? I've tried WinShell and MiKTeX, but I couldn't get any of them working... Here's an example of the output in R: % latex table generated in R 2.9.2 by xtable 1.5-6 package % Tue Nov 24

I was testing Ilia's patches for ddx, and while they definitely helped for Xorg itself, qemu still eats a lot of CPU if launched like this qemu-system-x86_64 -cdrom ~/Downloads/ISO/slax-English-US-7.0.8-x86_64.iso -m 1G -display sdl,gl=on -enable-kvm and left for few hours. top - 07:38:01 up 18:05, 2 users, load average: 2,00, 1,89, 1,83 Tasks: 224 total, 3 running, 221 sleeping, 0

Hello Again R Folks: I?m trying to clean up some code. Suppose I have an object like this: > str(test) List of 2 $ G:List of 2 ..$ cls:'data.frame': 101 obs. of 2 variables: .. ..$ V1: num [1:101] -0.0019 -0.0019 -0.00189 -0.00188 -0.00186 ... .. ..$ V2: num [1:101] 0.000206 0.000247 0.000288 0.000329 0.000371 ... ..$ rob:'data.frame': 101 obs. of 2

After rx vq was enabled, we never stop polling its socket. This is sub optimal when may lead unnecessary wake-ups after the rx net work has already been queued. This could be optimized by stopping polling the rx net sock when processing both rx and tx and restart it afterward. This could save unnecessary wake-ups and even unnecessary spin locks acquiring with the help of commit

After rx vq was enabled, we never stop polling its socket. This is sub optimal when may lead unnecessary wake-ups after the rx net work has already been queued. This could be optimized by stopping polling the rx net sock when processing both rx and tx and restart it afterward. This could save unnecessary wake-ups and even unnecessary spin locks acquiring with the help of commit

I've searched the Web with Google and do not find what might cause this particular error from an invocation of cenboxplot: cenboxplot(cu.t$quant, cu.t$ceneq1, cu.t$era, range=1.5, main='Total Recoverable Copper', ylab='Concentration (mg/L)', xlab='Time Period') Error in if (n > 0) (1L:n - a)/(n + 1 - 2 * a) else numeric() : argument is of length zero I do

Here is some timing information from running the Zig standard library tests: $ ./zig test ../std/index.zig --enable-timing-info Name Start End Duration Percent Initialize 0.0000 0.0010 0.0010 0.0001 Semantic Analysis 0.0010 0.9968 0.9958 0.1192 Code Generation 0.9968 1.4000 0.4032

Dear friends, I used R and SAS to analyze my data through generalized linear model, and there is some difference between them. Results from R: glm(formula = snail ~ grass + gheight + humidity + altitude + soiltemr + airtemr, family = Gamma) Deviance Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -1.23873 -0.41123 -0.08703 0.24339 1.21435 Coefficients:

Hi r-sers, I have a data of relative frequencies for the interval of 0-20, 20-40,...380-400.  I would like the two data on the same graph using the same x-axis label.  My question is how to get a smooth curve using kernel density code if it possible for this data.   > cbind(rel_obs,rel_gen)           rel_obs rel_gen  [1,] 0.000000000  0.0000  [2,] 0.092534175  0.0712  [3,] 0.105152471  0.1092

The DDX eating CPU isn't intrinsically bad. Did you check where perf says the CPU time is going? Could be doing copies/etc. On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:52 AM Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu at gmail.com> wrote: > > I was testing Ilia's patches for ddx, and while they definitely helped for Xorg itself, > qemu still eats a lot of CPU if launched like this > >

Hi Bob, are these performance regressions real? They look pretty serious. Ciao, Duncan. On 10/12/11 09:40, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/332/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time >

Dear R contributors, I have a problem in selecting in an efficient way, rows of a data frame according to a condition, which is a part of a row name of the table. The data frame is made of 64 rows and 2 columns, but the row names are very long but I need to select them according to a small part of it and perform calculations on the subsets. This is the example: X Y "Unique to

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:40:08AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > After rx vq was enabled, we never stop polling its socket. This is sub optimal > when may lead unnecessary wake-ups after the rx net work has already been > queued. This could be optimized by stopping polling the rx net sock when > processing both rx and tx and restart it afterward. This could save unnecessary > wake-ups

Dear all R-users, I wanted to fit a Garch(1,1) model to a dataset by: >garch1 = garch(na.omit(dat)) But I got a warning message while executing, which is: >Warning message: >NaNs produced in: sqrt(pred$e) The garch parameters that I got are: > garch1 Call: garch(x = na.omit(dat)) Coefficient(s): a0 a1 b1 1.212e-04 1.001e+00 1.111e-14 Can any one

Yes, they are real. I re-ran the two tests with the biggest execution time regressions, and the results were completely reproducible. On Oct 12, 2011, at 1:24 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bob, are these performance regressions real? They look pretty serious. > > Ciao, Duncan. > > On 10/12/11 09:40, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: >> >>

I rebuild mesa with debug symbols, and now top functions using CPU looks like this: CPU: AMD64 family15h, speed 3800 MHz (estimated) Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (CPU Clocks not Halted) with a unit mask of 0x00 (No unit mask) count 100000 samples % image name symbol name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 222978 45.1489

On 23.11.2012, at 15:12, john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2012, at 5:46 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> Adding LLVMdev, since this is intimately related to the optimization passes. >> >>> I think this is roughly because some function level optimisations are >>> worse than O(N) in the number of instructions. >>