search for: for_each

...cussions, etc. The background of how this came to be in LLVM is roughly: 1. I wanted to parallelize more work in LLDB, which has it's own non-nestable task execution model. It involved creating individual tasks, rather than describing the iteration requested, so I put together my own parallel:for_each-like implementation just for LLDB. 2. It was suggested that rather than have each LLVM subproject implement its own framework, that it should instead be put into LLVM proper. Zachary volunteered to do that, taking code from LLD and pulling it into LLVM. 3. It was then suggested that the interface...

...background of how this came to be in LLVM is roughly: > 1. I wanted to parallelize more work in LLDB, which has it's own > non-nestable task execution model. It involved creating individual tasks, > rather than describing the iteration requested, so I put together my own > parallel:for_each-like implementation just for LLDB. > 2. It was suggested that rather than have each LLVM subproject implement > its own framework, that it should instead be put into LLVM proper. Zachary > volunteered to do that, taking code from LLD and pulling it into LLVM. > 3. It was then suggested...

Hi all, This is just a PSA that as of r302752, 3 parallel algorithms (for_each, for_each_n, and sort) are available in llvm/Support/Parallel.h. Effort was made to match the C++ Parallelism TS N4507 [ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4507.pdf] as closely as possible, but some aspects were intentionally omitted. No support is added for the executor pro...

Hi all, There are currently a number of ways to extend RSpec that are documented inconsistently and work in sometimes conflicting and/or confusing ways. I''d like to resolve that. The recent addition of Spec::Runner.configure is part of that resolution. The thing I want to tackle now is the stuff that happens before and after each example. Currently (in trunk), things are executed in the

...that behavior in LLDB, and extend the implementation > in LLVM accordingly. > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This is just a PSA that as of r302752, 3 parallel algorithms (for_each, >> for_each_n, and sort) are available in llvm/Support/Parallel.h. >> >> Effort was made to match the C++ Parallelism TS N4507 [ >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4507.pdf] as >> closely as possible, but some aspects were intentionally omitte...

...that behavior in LLDB, and extend the implementation > in LLVM accordingly. > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This is just a PSA that as of r302752, 3 parallel algorithms (for_each, >> for_each_n, and sort) are available in llvm/Support/Parallel.h. >> >> Effort was made to match the C++ Parallelism TS N4507 [ >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4507.pdf] as >> closely as possible, but some aspects were intentionally omitte...

...'r' is the iterator and T is its value type. The inst_iterator, though, returns pointer to Instruction, not a reference to a pointer to instruction. The above might sound like I've gone crazy reading C++ standard, but my real reason is that with the current code the following: for_each(inst_begin(f), inst_end(f), boost::bind( apply_phi_semantics, result, _1, instruction2vertex)); does not compile, where 'apply_phi_semantics' is my function and boost::bind is a tool for binding function arguments described in http://www.boost.org/libs/bind/bind.html The r...

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Alex Vinokur wrote: > I would like to use LLVM-GCC to compare its performance with other compilers. > Something like testsuite "Computing very large Fibonacci numbers" at > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.c%2B%2B.perfometer/37. Out of curiousity, I ran some quick tests on a AMD Athlon(TM) MP 2100+ box running Redhat linux 7.1. With the LLVM C

...m\lib\Transforms\Scalar\LowerSwitch.cpp(211) : error C2039: 'sort' : is not a member of '_STL' llvm\lib\Analysis\BasicAliasAnalysis.cpp(700) : error C2039: 'sort' : is not a member of '_STL' llvm\lib\Analysis\IntervalPartition.cpp(29) : error C3861: 'for_each': identifier not found, even with argument-dependent lookup llvm\lib\Analysis\LoadValueNumbering.cpp(184) : error C2039: 'sort' : is not a member of '_STL' llvm\lib\Analysis\ScalarEvolution.cpp(362) : error C2039: 'sort' : is not a member of '_STL'...

...(seconds)); } void thread() { for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { wait(1); std::cout << i << std::endl; } } SEXP rcpp_hello_world(){ using namespace Rcpp ; using namespace boost::lambda; std::vector<int> a; a.push_back(1); a.push_back(2); // std::for_each( a.begin(), a.end(), _1 = 1); boost::thread t(thread); t.join(); return wrap(a); } ------------------------------- Makevars.win (try 1: try to find if there is a file called libboost_thread*) ------------------------------- ## Use the R_HOME indirection to support installations of mu...

...non-templated - container performance (Stepanov & Stroustrup) - copying files : input to output - dynamic_cast vs. switch - endl vs. "\n", '\n' [! stdout/stderr > tmp] - exception handling vs. if-statement - find method vs. find algorithm - for-loop vs. for_each - for_each vs. transform - iterators - multiple inheritance vs. single inheritance - primitive operators - pthreads - reading contents from file into one string - recursion vs. iteration vs. accumulate - str-functions vs. mem-functions (C) - string initialization (C vs. S...

Also note: there may be multiple MachineBasicBlock's for a single BasicBlock. - David M On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Jeff Kunkel <jdkunk3 at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think you can. > > The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, > so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the > same as any BasicBlock values.

...queryparser.set_stemming_strategy(QueryParser::STEM_NONE); Query query(queryparser.parse_query(full_string)); cout<<"Query is '"<<full_string<<"'"<<endl; Enquire enquire(db); enquire.set_query(query); MSet match_set(enquire.get_mset(0, 10)); for_each(match_set.begin(), match_set.end(), [&db](docid id) { print_doc_info(db.get_document(id)); }); I expected the following query to work, md5sum:DD4F2162FFFF0E43741A4A1C2B8EC0E7 but it returns nothing. Same for all the other terms and prefixes. Terms without prefixe...

Hi, I would like to use LLVM-GCC to compare its performance with other compilers. Something like testsuite "Computing very large Fibonacci numbers" at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.c%2B%2B.perfometer/37. My environment: ----------------- Windows 2000 Cygwin $ uname -srom CYGWIN_NT-5.0 1.5.11(0.116/4/2) i686 Cygwin ----------------- What do I have to download from

...65126== Address 0xb3fdfd0 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 216 free'd ==2265126== at 0x4C2A360: operator delete(void*) (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==2265126== by 0x99C0B75: operator() (queryinternal.cc:65) ==2265126== by 0x99C0B75: for_each<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<Xapian::PostingIterator::Internal**, std::vector<Xapian::PostingIterator::Internal*> >, delete_ptr<Xapian::PostingIterator::Internal> > (stl_algo.h:3755) ==2265126== by 0x99C0B75: Xapian::Internal::Context::reset() (queryintern...

Inline George > On Jan 26, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > George, given that, can you just build constexpr handling (it's not as easy as you think) as a separate funciton and have it use it in the right places? Will do. :) > FWIW, my current list of CFLAA issues is: > > 1. Unknown values (results from ptrtoint, incoming

George, given that, can you just build constexpr handling (it's not as easy as you think) as a separate funciton and have it use it in the right places? FWIW, my current list of CFLAA issues is: 1. Unknown values (results from ptrtoint, incoming pointers, etc) are not treated as unknown. These should be done through graph edge (so that they can be one way, otherwise, you will unify

...onstantExpr>(E.To)) + ConstantExprs.push_back(Constexpr); + if (auto* Constexpr = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(E.From)) + ConstantExprs.push_back(Constexpr); } + + for (ConstantExpr* CE : ConstantExprs) { + Edges.clear(); + constexprToEdges(Analysis, *CE, Edges); + std::for_each(Edges.begin(), Edges.end(), addEdgeToGraph); + } +} + +static bool canSkipAddingToSets(Value* Val) { + // Constants can share instances, which may falsely unify multiple + // sets, e.g. in + // store i32* null, i32** %ptr1 + // store i32* null, i32** %ptr2 + // clearly ptr1 and ptr2 should no...

...sses the second > +// argument along with each iterator to the function. If the function returns > +// true, then the current iterator is invalidated and it moves back, before > +// moving forward to the next iterator, otherwise it moves forward without > +// issue. This is based on the for_each STL function, but allows a reference to > +// the second argument > +template<class InputIterator, class Function, typename Arg> > +Function binaryForEach(InputIterator First, InputIterator Last, Function F, > + Arg &Second) > +{ > + for ( ; First!...

...l to parse_type above found a pack expansion - // substitution, then multiple names could have been - // inserted into the name table. Walk through the names, - // appending each onto the lambda's parameter list. - std::for_each(db.names.begin() + k0, db.names.begin() + k1, - [&](typename C::sub_type::value_type &pair) { - if (pair.empty()) - return; - auto &lambda...