search for: greedili

Hi, I have a data frame with one column and several rows of the form. "Peak Usage : init:2359296, used:15859328, committed:15892480, max:50331648Current Usage : init:2359296, used:15857920, committed:15892480, max:50331648|-------------------|" I tested the regex Current.*?[\|] in an online tester which greedily matches upto the first 'pipe' character Current

I was playing with Dovecot 1.1 full text indexing through Squat in late October, which was working pretty well. I wanted to ask about this behavior I had: When an email arrives in INBOX using procmail (which delivers to my Maildirs), and I see it in Dovecot, when I next do a search (IMAP SEARCH TEXT) of that folder, the search takes a long time. Successive searches are lickety-split. My

The company I work for require users to request what packages they want from the IT department (user cannot download themselves). I intend to request installation of the latest version of R plus the 23 Cran task views. As a statistician what are the recommended packages or packages that statisticians using R recommend to install. I have started a new position and want to (greedily) get everything

Does anyone know how to link Rails'' routes into anonymous controller classes created at runtime (defined with their superclass as ActionController::Base)? I''m trying to create a plugin for all of my projects that dynamically creates an active_scaffold controller for each model. It would essentially be like a scaffold_all_models for active_scaffold. I believe the original

I plan on rewriting the block placement algorithm to proceed by traces. A trace is a chain of blocks where each block in the chain may fall through to the successor in the chain. The overall algorithm would be to first produce traces for a function, and then order those traces to try and get cache locality. Currently block placement uses a greedy single step approach to layout. It produces

Hi, I reproduced the test on many individual files and got very variable results... it seems the computer's workload when running the test suite influenced the execution speed a lot more than standard deviation shows. I'll withdraw the performance claim until I can get consistent results (changed subject line), apologies for the confusion. What I can still show easily is that the

Hi, This answer is a bit slow; I tried to look into the sequence details but 250 passes plus the complex bitcode of test suite examples makes this pretty hard. In the meantime I stumbled upon llvm-diff which abstracts away the most significant difference, namely instruction renaming. It also ignores function attributes so calling conventions are silently unified; but at least it gives empty

Hi, I find it's quite strange how condition dependent instructions are processed in PeepholeOptimizer::runOnMachineFunction: 01577 if ((isUncoalescableCopy(*MI) && 01578 optimizeUncoalescableCopy(MI, LocalMIs)) || 01579 (MI->isCompare() && optimizeCmpInstr(MI, &MBB)) || 01580 (MI->isSelect() && optimizeSelect(MI,

Hi Quentin, Yes, the code allows to process connected instructions. Although it should be taken into account that the instruction next to the current processed instruction must never be erased because this invalidates iterator. I've been fixing a bug in AArch64InstrInfo::optimizeCompareInstr: instructions are converted into S form but it's not checked that they produce the same flags as

> On Sep 14, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Kyle Butt via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I plan on rewriting the block placement algorithm to proceed by traces. > > A trace is a chain of blocks where each block in the chain may fall through to > the successor in the chain. > > The overall algorithm would be to first produce traces for a function, and then >

Given > D = data.frame(o=gl(2,1,4)) this works as I expected: > evalq(o, D) [1] 1 2 1 2 Levels: 1 2 but neither of these does: > f <- function(x, dat) evalq(x, dat) > f(o, D) Error in eval(expr, envir, enclos) : object "o" not found > g <- function(x, dat) eval(x, dat) > g(o, D) Error in eval(x, dat) : object "o" not found What am I doing wrong?

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > > On Sep 14, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Kyle Butt via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I plan on rewriting the block placement algorithm to proceed by traces. > > A trace is a chain of blocks where each block in the chain may fall > through to > the successor in the chain.

Hi, I've been trying to use rsync to backup the content of a large web application on our Digital unix servers. I'm having some success but the main problem is the sheer number of files and subdirectories which must be copied/maintained between the two servers (one is our standby system). Believe it or not there are in excess of 7.5 million files/directories which must be synced between

> On Sep 18, 2017, at 5:17 PM, Kyle Butt <iteratee at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com <mailto:atrick at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Sep 14, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Kyle Butt via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> I plan on

Hello, I need some help with regex. I have this to sentences. I need to extract both "49MU6300" and "LE32S5970" and put them in a new colum "SKU". A) SMART TV UHD 49'' CURVO 49MU6300 B) SMART TV HD 32'' LE32S5970 DataFrame for testing: ecommerce <- data.frame(a = c(1,2), producto = c("SMART TV UHD 49'' CURVO 49MU6300",

Hello list, This is a follow-up from a question I asked last month. I'm evaluating the performance of two pass sequences that resemble (but are not) -O3. With -O3, -debug-pass=Structure prints several independent blocks that seem to represent several calls to opt. I focused on two of these blocks, say S1 and S2, and compared the following optimization methods: 1. Executing them

>After off list discussions with Jonathan Carrol and with >Michael Lawrence I think it's doable, unambiguous, >and even imo pretty intuitive for an "unquote" operator. For those of us who are not CS/Lisp mavens, what is an "unquote" operator? Can you expression quoting and unquoting in R syntax and show a few examples where is is useful, intuitive, and fits in to

The unquoting discussion is IMHO separate from this proposal and as you noted probably better served by a native operator with different precedence. I think the main benefit to providing user defined prefix operators is it allows package authors to experiment with operator ideas and gauge community interest. The current situation means any novel unary semantics either need to co-opt existing

I agree there is no reason they _need_ to be the same precedence, but I think SPECIALS are already have the proper precedence for both unary and binary calls. Namely higher than all the binary operators (except for `:`), but lower than the other unary operators. Even if we gave unary specials their own precedence I think it would end up in the same place. `%l%` <- function(x) tail(x, n =

Jim, One more note about precedence. It prevents a solution like the one you proposed from solving all of the problems you cited. By my reckoning, a "What comes next is for NSE" unary operator needs an extremely low precedence, because it needs to greedily grab "everything" (or a large amount) that comes after it. Normal-style unary operators, on the other hand, explicitly