Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20 matches for "2000.0".
Did you mean:
1000.0
2010 Apr 08
3
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
results (with no test failures)...
================================================================================
Date & Time : 7 Apr 2010 22:24:16
Test Name : llvm_gfortran_lin_p4
Compile Command : llvm-gfortran -ffast-math -funroll-loops -msse3
2011 Apr 09
2
[LLVMdev] dragonegg/llvm-gfortran/gfortran benchmarks
With the case-insensitive file system patch from http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9656#c15
applied to dragonegg 2.9, the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks are seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10
under gcc 4.5.3svn using the dragonegg plugin...
================================================================================
Date & Time : 8 Apr 2011 19:52:56
Test Name :
2010 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
> with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
> results (with no test failures)...
Very nice! A 14% speedup on a benchmark we don't tune for isn't bad. I imagine that there are several easy wins you could get on it if you were interested
2010 Sep 20
1
[LLVMdev] Polyhedron 2005 regressions
Comparing the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for gfortran from
llvm-gcc-4.2 of April 7th, 2010 and September 18th, 2010 (from
the rc2 2.8 release branch), we seem to be regressing in performance
for this release....
================================================================================
Date & Time : 7 Apr 2010 22:24:16
Test Name : llvm_gfortran_lin_p4
Compile Command :
2010 Apr 08
3
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:54:36PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> > Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
> > with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
> > results (with no test failures)...
>
> Very nice! A 14% speedup on a benchmark we don't tune for
2010 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
[CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt for GC. When you build for Fortran, darwin-c.o is not linked so the GC gets
2011 Feb 21
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
On Feb 19, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
> failing here with...
It was broken. I think I've fixed it in reverting 125960.
-eric
2011 Apr 09
0
[LLVMdev] dragonegg/llvm-gfortran/gfortran benchmarks
Hi Jack, thanks for the numbers. Any chance of analysing why gcc does better on
those where it does much better than dragonegg?
Ciao, Duncan.
> With the case-insensitive file system patch from http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9656#c15
> applied to dragonegg 2.9, the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks are seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10
> under gcc 4.5.3svn using the dragonegg
2011 Feb 22
1
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 03:58:19PM -0800, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> > Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
> > failing here with...
>
> It was broken. I think I've fixed it in reverting 125960.
>
> -eric
Eric,
The llvm-gcc42 bootstrap is fixed in
2010 Apr 08
1
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:45:48AM -0700, Bob Wilson wrote:
> [CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
>
> The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt
2011 Feb 19
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
failing here with...
/sw/src/fink.build/llvm-gcc42-2.9-0/llvm_gcc42_objdir/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/sw/src/fink.build/llvm-gcc42-2.9-0/llvm_gcc42_objdir/./prev-gcc/ -B/sw/lib/llvm-gcc-4.2/x86_64-apple-darwin10/bin/ -c -g -O2 -mdynamic-no-pic -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
2003 Aug 04
0
Feedback Bootstrapping
Dear experienced R-users,
I am having some probably trivial trouble estimating the confidence interval
for the difference of two group means, with groups been of unequal sample
size. I am using the "Bootstrap" package and the function
"bcanon"(bcanon(x, nboot, theta, ...,alpha=c(0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 0.16, 0.84,
0.9, 0.95, 0.975)) for Nonparametric BCa confidence limits.
The
2010 Apr 08
2
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:45 AMPDT, Bob Wilson wrote:
> [CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
>
> The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt for GC.
2010 Jul 07
1
Why do <none>s appear in the list of predictor variables in logistic regression using 'step' or 'stepAIC' function?
Would anyone help me solve my problem with R, please? I am very new to R. I am doing logistic regression analysis on the presence/absence of salamanders using several predictor variables, as shown below. I have checked my data, but I didn't find any 'NA' or empty cells. When I used step() or stepAIC to select significant predictor variables, <none>s appear to places where
2004 Oct 31
0
Re: ices-kh dropping jack ports unexpectedly
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:06:00 +0100, Andy Baxter wrote:
> I've been having a problem where ices-kh (the jack'ified version)
> disconnects from its jack input source unexpectedly. This happens mainly
> while other jack clients are being started/stopped, or
> connected/disconnected, but also at other times (e.g. switching between
> different X sessions). I'm planning to do
2004 Oct 18
9
ices-kh dropping jack ports unexpectedly
I've been having a problem where ices-kh (the jack'ified version)
disconnects from its jack input source unexpectedly. This happens mainly
while other jack clients are being started/stopped, or
connected/disconnected, but also at other times (e.g. switching between
different X sessions). I'm planning to do a bit more work on tuning up the
jack setup to see if I can get rid of the
2016 Jul 24
2
Weighting Schemes: Evaluation results
Hi all,
I have evaluated new weighting schemes along with their existing
counterparts in Xapian to compare and see which one does better job.
Also, I have put together all the results files for easy access here:
https://github.com/ivmarkp/xapian-evaluation/tree/evaluation/run
and a README for getting started with xapian-evaluation module. Hopefully,
it might be of help to those who are new to
2008 Oct 31
6
[LLVMdev] polyhedron 2005 results for llvm svn
I am finding with the patch that all of the Polyhedron 2005
benchmarks pass on i686-apple-darwin9. Could someone clarify the
regression rules for releases? Not building a secondary language
on a primary target is usually considered a P1 regression for
FSF gcc. Not doing so here gives one the impression that llvm.org
isn't playing by the same rules. No one is ever going to want to
use these
2004 Oct 31
2
Re: ices-kh dropping jack ports unexpectedly
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:32:17 +0000, andy wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:06:00 +0100, Andy Baxter wrote:
>
>> I've been having a problem where ices-kh (the jack'ified version)
>> disconnects from its jack input source unexpectedly. This happens mainly
>> while other jack clients are being started/stopped, or
>> connected/disconnected, but also at other times
2016 Jul 25
3
Weighting Schemes: Evaluation results
Hi James,
> We probably don't want them committed in git where they're evaluation
> runs (because we can recreate them); a gist might be more appropriate.
Sorry, I have moved results files over to gist for each individual
weighting scheme.
Link: https://gist.github.com/ivmarkp/secret
> I can't tell, but are some of those files from FIRE? If so, they
> shouldn't be