search for: emme

Hi all, We followed some books and sample codes and did some EMM estimation, only to find it won't be able to generate forecast. This is because in the stochastic volatility models we are estimating, the volatilities are latent variables, and we want to forecast 1-step ahead or h-step ahead volatilities. So it is nice to have the system estimated, but we couldn't get it to forecast at

I just uploaded two packages to CRAN. shapefiles_0.1.tar.gz - functions to read and write ESRI shapefiles (including dbfs) emme2_0.1.tar.gz - functions to read binary data from an EMME/2 databank data (EMME/2 is a transportation modeling program) Please let me know if you find any bugs or have some suggestions. Thanks. Regards, Benjamin Stabler Transportation Planning Analysis Unit Oregon Department of Transportation 555...

Instead of emm-dashes I get struck-out text surrounded with single hyphens. RedCloth 3.0.4: >> d = RedCloth.new "-- hyphens to the left of me, hyphens to the right, all should be emm dashes --" => "-- hyphens to the left of me, hyphens to the right, all should be emm dashes --" >> d.to_html => "<p><del>- hyphens to the left of me, hyphens

Hi Bill, Comments inline: On 24/10/2011 9:50 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Oct 20, 2011, at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm working on a graphics project which uses LLVM for dynamic code >> generation, and I noticed a major performance regression when upgrading >> from LLVM 2.8 to 3.0-rc1 (LLVM 2.9 didn't support Win64 so I

Hello, everyone I have a piece of code that looks like this: mrets <- merge(mrets, BMM.SR=apply(mrets, 1, MyFunc, ret="BMM.AV120", stdev="BMM.SD120")) mrets <- merge(mrets, GM1.SR=apply(mrets, 1, MyFunc, ret="GM1.AV120", stdev="GM1.SD120")) mrets <- merge(mrets, IYC.SR=apply(mrets, 1, MyFunc, ret="IYC.AV120",

On Sep 7, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > Hi all, > > I've tested a recent revision and noticed that using 64-bit vectors became very slow. It looks like they are expanded to non-MMX instructions to avoid breaking code which does not clear the MMX state using emms? > > For my project I'm already manually inserting emms instructions in the right places, so

> This is a matter of presentation, but some of the "GCC extensions" are > standard C99 (now, at least). I noticed long long, C++-style comments > and designated initializers. > > I have plenty of complaints about the GCC documentation you're > pointing at, but this probably isn't the right forum for that. I do > think dropping "as fast as

On Oct 20, 2011, at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on a graphics project which uses LLVM for dynamic code > generation, and I noticed a major performance regression when upgrading > from LLVM 2.8 to 3.0-rc1 (LLVM 2.9 didn't support Win64 so I skipped it > entirely). > > I found out that the performance regression is due to removing

Hi all, I'm working on a graphics project which uses LLVM for dynamic code generation, and I noticed a major performance regression when upgrading from LLVM 2.8 to 3.0-rc1 (LLVM 2.9 didn't support Win64 so I skipped it entirely). I found out that the performance regression is due to removing support for lowering 64-bit vector operations to MMX, and using SSE2 instead. My code uses a

On Oct 26, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > On 24/10/2011 9:50 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> On Oct 20, 2011, at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm working on a graphics project which uses LLVM for dynamic code >>> generation, and I noticed a major performance regression when upgrading >>> from LLVM

On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 3:02 PM Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com> wrote: > Broadly speaking, I see two problems with implicitly enabling MMX > emulation on a target that has SSE2: > > > > 1. The interaction with inline asm. Inline asm can still have MMX > operands/results/clobbers, and can still put the processor in MMX mode. If > code is mixing MMX

On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:24 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Nicolas Capens > <nicolas.capens at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> It's not broken, but the performance is crippled. >> >> I noticed that the code still contains some MMX instructions, but several >> operations get expanded (apparently swizzling and such

On Feb 10, 2008, at 11:26 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> This is a matter of presentation, but some of the "GCC extensions" >> are >> standard C99 (now, at least). I noticed long long, C++-style >> comments >> and designated initializers. >> >> I have plenty of complaints about the GCC documentation you're >> pointing at, but this

Hi all, I'm trying to compile asterisk on the mainframe (s390 / s390x) and I am running into issues. I was wondering if somebody could give a hand? I'm thinking that I should be able to do this. I have noticed that Debian even has binary RPM's out for Asterisk now. I'm trying to do this on SuSE SLES8 (with the 2.4 kernel). What I see is, an issue that arch=s390 isn't

I recently diagnosed a bug in someone else's software, which turned out to be due to incorrect MMX intrinsics usage: if you use any of the x86 intrinsics that accept or return __m64 values, then you, the *programmer* are required to call _mm_empty() before using any x87 floating point instructions or leaving the function. I was aware that this was required at the assembly-level, but not that

On Apr 14, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> I looked at the program using a debugger, and the pfadd instruction is >> executed correctly and the MMX register contains the correct values. >> The code that prepares the stack for the printf call seems to be >> messing it up. > > I would call that "user error"; basically, using MMX instructions >

On Feb 10, 2008, at 12:25 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > Hi All, > > The first draft of the llvm 2.2 release notes are now available: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html > > The release is scheduled for Monday, so please take a look at them and > send me your feedback, or (better yet) just commit fixes directly to > the document in llvm/docs/ReleaseNotes.html. In

Hi All, The first draft of the llvm 2.2 release notes are now available: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html The release is scheduled for Monday, so please take a look at them and send me your feedback, or (better yet) just commit fixes directly to the document in llvm/docs/ReleaseNotes.html. In addition to editing improvements I'm particularly interested in adding missing things

On Aug 31, 2010, at 10:19 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Hi Argiris, > > The real problem here is that the X86 backend is turning datatypes like <1 x i64> into MMX operations, but doesn't do so in a safe way (it's not inserting the requisite EMMS instructions). After discussing this with Dale and Bill, the right fix is to stop mapping generic vectors onto MMX operations.

On Aug 31, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote: > Hi, > > I've attached 2 .ll files which are supposed to be equivalent but 'unopt-fail.ll' causes a crash in webkit's test suite while 'unopt-pass.ll' does not. I can't give more details about the crash, when I run the crashing test it in isolation it passes, when I run the full suite it crashes; it