Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "dimissed".
Did you mean:
dismissed
2012 Oct 02
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] OpenMP Representation in LLVM IR
...go.
> What is the reason for
> the "paralleliation metadata?" It seems to me this implies/requires that
> LLVM have knowledge of parallel semantics. That would be very
> unfortunate.
The reasons are listed in "Function Outlining" section of my proposal.
You simply dimissed them with:
> This is a very high-level transformation. I don't think it belongs in a low-level backend.
> A higher-level IR would be more appropriate for this, either something provided by Clang or another frontend or a some other mid-level IR.
> You're assuming all optimizatio...
2012 Oct 02
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] OpenMP Representation in LLVM IR
Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> writes:
Hi Hal,
> As you may know, this is the third such proposal over the past two
> months, one by me
> (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-August/052472.html)
This link seems to be broken. I missed your earlier proposal and would
like to read it. As with this proposal, I fear any direct
parallelization support in LLVM is going to
2012 Oct 02
1
[LLVMdev] [RFC] OpenMP Representation in LLVM IR
...just parallelization, but GPU IR,
eval-style inline bitcode, etc.) are starting to feel like
mission-creep.
That's all. I'm not forcibly objecting to anything. Just passing on
thoughts.
> The reasons are listed in "Function Outlining" section of my proposal.
> You simply dimissed them with:
I apologize for offending you. That was certainly not my intent.
-David
2009 Apr 21
1
Closed-source non-free ParallelR ?
Dear R-devel,
REvolution appear to be offering ParallelR only when bundled with their R Enterprise edition. As such it appears to be non-free and closed source.
http://www.revolution-computing.com/products/parallel-r.php
Since R is GPL and not LGPL, is this a breach of the GPL ?
Below is the "GPL and ParallelR" thread from their R forum.
mdowle > It appears that ParallelR