search for: do_foo

...i, PS: It is a generic question related to partial loop unrolling, and nothing specific to LLVM. As far as partial loop unrolling is concerned, I could see following three different possibilities. Assume that unroll factor is 3. Original loop: for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) { do_foo(i); } 1. First possibility i = 0; do_foo(i++); do_foo(i++); do_foo(i++); for (; i < 10; i++) { do_foo(i); } 2. Second possibility for (i = 0; i < 7; i++) { do_foo(i); } do_foo(i++); do_foo(i+...

...ide of the function definitions (i.e to make it global) but when called in the 3rd function i get > *** caught bus error *** address 0x0, cause 'invalid alignment'" I tried Callocing it in the 1st function but to no avail. Here is a quick summary. When foo is called (through do_foo, **after** having called do_kNN_e) i get the aforementioned error. Can anyone provide some pointers (no pun intended) on this? Thanks Saptarshi ANN* book; int* foot; void foo(void){ Rprintf("many times\n"); Rprintf("%p\n",book); Rprintf("%p\n",foot); }...

...ide of the function definitions (i.e to make it global) but when called in the 3rd function i get > *** caught bus error *** address 0x0, cause 'invalid alignment'" I tried Callocing it in the 1st function but to no avail. Here is a quick summary. When foo is called (through do_foo, **after** having called do_kNN_e) i get the aforementioned error. Can anyone provide some pointers (no pun intended) on this? Thanks Saptarshi ANN* book; int* foot; void foo(void){ Rprintf("many times\n"); Rprintf("%p\n",book); Rprintf("%p\n",foot); }...

Hello all, I've run into a problem with returning a struct on Linux x86. Consider the following two pieces of code: # cat a.ll declare { i32, i32 } @foo(i32, i32, i32) define void @do_foo() { call { i32, i32 } @foo(i32 1, i32 2, i32 3) ret void } # cat b.c #include <stdio.h> #include <stdint.h> extern void do_foo(); int main() { do_foo(); return 0; } struct A { int32_t...

I have a number of fixtures in my test suite. For example, with acts_as_authenticated and acts_as_state_machine, I created a number of users in different account states for use in functional testing. (Suspended users can not log in, etc) Is it a good idea to run fixtures through tests to ensure that they conform to their ideals? EG: assert users(:suspended_user).suspended? If so, where should

There is a problem with `rpois'. It does seem to take care about the order of the arguments. This is an example: > rpois(n=1,lambda=2) [1] 3 > rpois(lambda=2,n=1) [1] 2 0 It obviously uses the first argument as the number of samples to be drawn, which is wrong. I used Version 0.49 Beta (April 23, 1997). Fredrik

There is a problem with `rpois'. It does seem to take care about the order of the arguments. This is an example: > rpois(n=1,lambda=2) [1] 3 > rpois(lambda=2,n=1) [1] 2 0 It obviously uses the first argument as the number of samples to be drawn, which is wrong. I used Version 0.49 Beta (April 23, 1997). Fredrik

This patch adds a new option for xen config files for directly mapping hardware io memory into a vm. Signed-off-by: Matthew Fioravante <matthew.fioravante@jhuapl.edu> diff --git a/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5 b/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5 index 013270d..428da21 100644 --- a/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5 +++ b/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5 @@ -496,6 +496,17 @@ is given in hexadecimal and may either a span e.g.