search for: esoteric

...be done quite easily without knowing the exact size of a pointer. > When it comes to being able to "generate once, run anywhere", LLVM is like > 99.5% of the way there. Which makes that last remaining .5% particularly > vexing. > > There's only a tiny handful of fairly esoteric cases which require selecting > a target before you generate IR. Unfortunately, the "pointer the same size > as an int" is one of these rare cases -  it is something that is very > painful to try and work around. (A similar esoteric use case is: "which of > the following...

...machine. Most things can be done quite easily without knowing the exact size of a pointer. When it comes to being able to "generate once, run anywhere", LLVM is like 99.5% of the way there. Which makes that last remaining .5% particularly vexing. There's only a tiny handful of fairly esoteric cases which require selecting a target before you generate IR. Unfortunately, the "pointer the same size as an int" is one of these rare cases - it is something that is very painful to try and work around. (A similar esoteric use case is: "which of the following two types is larger,...

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:10 AM, me22 <me22.ca at gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/11/9 Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com>: >> >> 1. Conversions to/from other integer types: right now, integer type >> conversions are always explicity specified as either a trunc, a sext, >> or a zext.  Since the size of intp is not known at IR generation time, >> you

Hey everyone, I'm at the point with our local AVX tree that I'm ready to move some stuff upstream. We've got most of the basic stuff implemented. The more esoteric stuff still has to be done. Because the more esoteric stuff might require some extensive changes to the existing AVX infrastructure, I suspect there might be quite a bit of church until we get things stabilized. Due to that, I'm proposing we create an "avx" branch so I can push chan...

...y without knowing the exact size of a pointer. >> When it comes to being able to "generate once, run anywhere", LLVM is like >> 99.5% of the way there. Which makes that last remaining .5% particularly >> vexing. >> >> There's only a tiny handful of fairly esoteric cases which require selecting >> a target before you generate IR. Unfortunately, the "pointer the same size >> as an int" is one of these rare cases - it is something that is very >> painful to try and work around. (A similar esoteric use case is: "which of >&gt...

...ame SERVER<0x20> Connecting to nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn at port 139 error connecting to nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn:139 (Connection refused) unable to connect to SMB server on machine SERVER. Error was : code 0. Failed to change password for ID Can anyone shed some light on this issue? -- Until later: Geoffrey esoteric@denali.atlnet.com I'm afraid there will be more problems with W2K than there were with Y2K...

What is the current state of the R-art for ordered probit models, and more esoterically is there any available R strategy for ordered cauchit models, i.e. ordered multinomial alternatives with a cauchy link function. MCMC is an option, obviously, but for a univariate latent variable model this seems to be overkill... standard mle methods should be preferable. (??) Googling re...

On the topic of code owners: Would it make sense to add target-specific code owners for the codegen targets? Some of the targets are more esoteric (e.g. NVPTX, CellSPU, AMDGPU) and may benefit from more fine-grained code ownership. On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > On 12 November 2012 15:55, Meador Inge <meadori at codesourcery.com> wrote: > > Another point to address i...

David Brahm <brahm at alum.mit.edu> wrote: >VBMorozov at lbl.gov wrote: >> I would like to pass variables to a function in R in "by reference"... >Just in case the ensuing discussion got too esoteric, here's one simple answer: >R> x <- 1:10 >R> MyFunc <- function(x, zz) assign(deparse(substitute(zz)), sum(x), 1) >R> MyFunc(x,y) >R> y > [1] 55 Still less esoteric is > MyFunc <- function(x,zz) zz <<- sum(x) > MyFunc(1:10,y) > y [1] 55...

...o construct that... should I make a wiser use of these "apply, tapply, sapply" marvels? I dunno. does something like for (i in 1:G){sapply(b(i),sw)} were b(i) is the dataframe for column i, and SW is a function (super function-procedure) make sense in R? I see that there are some fully esoterical paragraphs on things that seem to be relevant in the manuals.. but.. esoterical.. I cannot make sense of them... vicious circle.. Thank you in advance for any courageous that would give me a hint.. Christina

...> pointer. >>> When it comes to being able to "generate once, run anywhere", LLVM is >>> like >>> 99.5% of the way there. Which makes that last remaining .5% particularly >>> vexing. >>> >>> There's only a tiny handful of fairly esoteric cases which require >>> selecting >>> a target before you generate IR. Unfortunately, the "pointer the same >>> size >>> as an int" is one of these rare cases -  it is something that is very >>> painful to try and work around. (A similar esoter...

...gt; I don't like working with the ISC DNS, and I'd like working with >> "dnsmasq" under samba 4 too. > My understanding of the situation is that full integration with AD > requires support for dynamic DNS and the ability to update DNS zones > with a fair variety of esoteric record types. To provide that sort of > facility in dnsmasq would require re-writing and generalising a lot > of code. [...] But what about people who want to use Samba without ADS, perhaps far away from a Windows environment? It's more simple to configure, it doesn't need speci...

...e nice, and there are lots of nifty features the SNOM offers that I haven't seen on other phones -- for example, netcat is used for debugging OpenVPN, and a SIP log is truly nifty. One-line summary: recommended, but be prepared to spend some time getting the first one going if some of the more esoteric features (VPN, WLAN) are used. -Ken -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

...dd a method to TargetRegisterInfo which returns a PBQPProblemBuilder for the target architectures. I implement a base PBQPProblemBuilder by simply lifting the current construction process out of the PBQP allocator and into its own class. Anyone (such as yourself, Carlos) who wants to represent more esoteric constraints in their architecture just extends this class, calls the base class to handle all the basic constraints, then performs their own pass over the function to add in their constraints: struct MyTargetPBQPProblemBuilder : public PBQPProblemBuilder { PBQP::Graph* buildProblemFor(MachineFun...

...ering if there is a way to get a value by name in the C interface for the LLVM Jit? There seems to be a way to name values consistently, but no way to retrieve those LLVMValueRef's by name. I see it is possible to get a struct by name and a type by name and a function by name, and a few other esoteric things, but not a general value. The reason I am wanting this is that I am writing a language where there is a separation between the back end and the code which processes the AST. In particular, I do not have any LLVM values or types in the AST nodes themselves, only strings naming those values a...

...t; consider it a huge deal. Anyway, if someone is willing to review this, I > can pursue rebasing it. Okay. We are interested in getting something akin to your patch delivered; at least so that the dbg intrinsics gets marked as norecurse. Unfortunately I'm not very familiar with more "esoteric" intrinsics, so I can't bring anything special to the table when it comes to reviewing that the set of exempted intrinsics is correct. Other than that I can gladly help in whatever way to help this patch land. (I rebased your patch, and it seems like there where only a few, minor updates...

...s put in a hook into validate the state of the object at the point of time into and out of the method. If this isn''t the place of mocha, where should I do it? (And yes, one can easily argue that I''m likely making my test case too complicated if I have to do this, but we found an esoteric bug on a short-lived object and having a test to check for this specific case would help make sure that bug stays away.) -- Virtually, Ned Wolpert "Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin..." --Marlowe Discere docendo...

...probe device to make sure > >it's still alive? > > but there is always some race, isn't it? To clarify, why this might not be very elegant, a timer-based solution for surprise removal during driver cleanup might be easier than trying to build robust interfaces to address this esoteric case. But what worries me is that it's not clear to me that ccw won't invoke notify in parallel with remove callback. If this happens there will be use after free. -- MST

...probe device to make sure > >it's still alive? > > but there is always some race, isn't it? To clarify, why this might not be very elegant, a timer-based solution for surprise removal during driver cleanup might be easier than trying to build robust interfaces to address this esoteric case. But what worries me is that it's not clear to me that ccw won't invoke notify in parallel with remove callback. If this happens there will be use after free. -- MST

On Nov 2, 2009, at 11:48 AM, David Greene wrote: > Hey everyone, > > I'm at the point with our local AVX tree that I'm ready to move some > stuff upstream. We've got most of the basic stuff implemented. The > more esoteric stuff still has to be done. > > Because the more esoteric stuff might require some extensive changes > to > the existing AVX infrastructure, I suspect there might be quite a bit > of church until we get things stabilized. > > Due to that, I'm proposing we create an "...