search for: 0.0156

Hello Török. Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com> writes: > On 2009-08-26 16:57, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> llc needs 45 seconds. This is far worse than the 33 seconds used by the >> JIT. Maybe llc is using optimizations. My JIT have no optimizations >> enabled. >> >> Yup, llc -O0 takes 37.5 seconds. >> >> llc -pre-RA-sched=fast -regalloc=local

On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:47 AM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> Also if you use -time-passes with llc it should show which pass in >> llc >> takes so much time. > > These are the three main culprits for llc -O0 > > ---User Time--- --System Time-- --User+System-- ---Wall > Time--- --- Name --- > 10.9531 ( 30.0%) 0.4687 ( 58.8%) 11.4218 ( 30.6%) 11.5468

I am trying to use lm for a simple linear fit with weights. The results I get from IDL (which I am more familiar with) seem correct and intuitive, but the "lm" function in R gives outputs that seem strange to me. Unweighted case: > x<-1:4 > y<-(1:4)^2 > summary(lm(y~x)) Call: lm(formula = y ~ x) Residuals: 1 2 3 4 1 -1 -1 1 Coefficients:

A rather notorious aspect of TableGen is the time required to run the -emit-dag-isel backend on some targets, including AMDGPU and X86. I added a timing feature to TableGen and timed the AMDGPU run. ===-------------------------------------------------------------------------=== TableGen Phase Timing

Hello, I'm at the very beginning of the learning process of this language. Sorry in advance for the (possible but plausible) stupidity of my question. I would like to find a way to permute the DIMENSIONS of an array. Something that sounds like the function "permute()" in matlab. Given an array C of dimensions c x d x T , for instance, the command permute(C, [2 1 3]) would provide

On 2009-08-26 16:57, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > llc needs 45 seconds. This is far worse than the 33 seconds used by the > JIT. Maybe llc is using optimizations. My JIT have no optimizations > enabled. > > Yup, llc -O0 takes 37.5 seconds. > > llc -pre-RA-sched=fast -regalloc=local takes 26 seconds. Much better but > still slow IMO. The question is if this avoids the non-linear

Dear list members, I have a 2-factor ANOVA where the summary.lm output looks like this (using treatment contrasts): Value Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 0.0389 0.0220 1.7695 0.0817 as.factor(Block)1 0.0156 0.0066 2.3597 0.0215 as.factor(Block)2 -0.0018 0.0037 -0.4857 0.6289 as.factor(Block)3 -0.0007 0.0026 -0.2812 0.7795

Like earth can be trained simultaneously for degree and nprune, is there a way to train ctree simultaneously for mincriterion and maxdepth? Also, I notice there are separate methods ctree and ctree2, and if both options are attempted to tune with one method, the summary averages the option it doesn't support. The full log is attached, and notice these lines below for

I wouldn't want to be too hasty about simply removing the relaxation algorithm. The size and speed of the compiler affects all users, but the time to compile the compiler "only" affects us compiler developers. And I speak as a developer who is heavily affected by the time to compile the AMDGPU backend. One off-the-cuff idea (I haven't even looked at the code yet): could we pass

Hi, I have a compiler project using an LLVM backend (compiled for 64 bit windows), and since it has started to get to production level source code sizes the compile times have gotten somewhat extreme (around 30 mins each time). Not sure what is the best metric for measuring whether 30 mins is reasonable. The .ll output file is ~1.5 million lines. A snip of the top of the stats output is

Estimados miembros de la lista, Estoy haciendo una análisis de supervivencia con R. Adjunto mis datos. Quiero analizar la supervivencia de 5 grupos diferentes y compararla. Para ello estoy utilizando el paquete survival. > s = Surv(c$tiempo, c$estado) > f = survfit(s ~ tratamiento, data = c) > d = survdiff(s ~ tratamiento, data = c) > d Call: survdiff(formula = s ~ tratamiento,

On Aug 26, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:47 AM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >>> Also if you use -time-passes with llc it should show which pass in >>> llc >>> takes so much time. >> >> These are the three main culprits for llc -O0 >> >> ---User Time--- --System Time-- --User+System--

I am having trouble understanding results I'm getting back from coxph doing a recurrent event analysis. I've included the model below and the summary. In some cases, with minor variations, the Robust variance and Wald tests are significant, but the individual covariates may or may not be significant. My main question is: If Wald and robust tests both take into account the

This is great! Thanks Paul! I think that the 9x reduction in compile-time is well worth the 4% size increase. TableGen's run-time has been a sore point and a source of complaints for quite some time. -- Krzysztof Parzyszek kparzysz at quicinc.com AI tools development -----Original Message----- From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Paul C.

Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Óscar Fuentes<ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: >> Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Óscar Fuentes<ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: >>>> While compiling some sources, translating from my compiler's IR to LLVM

Using the small reproducible example below, I'd like to know if one can somehow use the matrix "sig" (defined below) to add a black outline (with lwd=2) to all pixels with a corresponding value of 1 in the matrix 'sig'? So for example, in the ggplot2 plot below, the pixel located at [1,3] would be outlined by a black square since the value at sig[1,3] == 1. This is my first

This is the size of the table, not the size of the overall binary, right? I would imagine that a 4% growth in the size of the table is a substantially smaller growth in the total executable size of, say, clang. If the overall growth is minuscule (say, under 1%), then this seems like the clear path forward. I’m also optimistic that we might be able to find other ways to shrink the tables to make

[cross-posted to -biz and -users since it could fall into either category] Interesting new product that has been introduced that I think some would be interested in here (at least, those users in the United States and perhaps Canada): CNAM delivery via IP lookup. The problem: inbound calls on many PRI connections, and also over many VoIP providers, do not include caller name. This means that

Hi Eric, you can use an annotate-layer, eg ind<-which(sig>0,arr.ind = T) ggplot(m1.melted, aes(x = Month, y = Site, fill = Concentration), autoscale = FALSE, zmin = -1 * zmax1, zmax = zmax1) + geom_tile() + coord_equal() + scale_fill_gradient2(low = "darkred", mid = "white", high = "darkblue",

A big compile time regression. Any ideas? Ciao, Duncan. On 22/07/11 19:13, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/253/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time > Current 253 0 2011-07-22 16:22:04