search for: hasvalue

...age(const T &y) : hasVal(true) { new (storage.buffer) T(y); > } > + OptionalStorage &operator=(const T &y) { > + new (storage.buffer) T(y); > + hasVal = true; > + return *this; > } > > - explicit operator bool() const { return hasVal; } > - bool hasValue() const { return hasVal; } > - const T *operator->() const { return getPointer(); } > - T *operator->() { return getPointer(); } > - const T &operator*() const LLVM_LVALUE_FUNCTION { > - assert(hasVal); > - return *getPointer(); > + void reset() { hasVal = fals...

...new (storage.buffer) T(y); >> } >> + OptionalStorage &operator=(const T &y) { >> + new (storage.buffer) T(y); >> + hasVal = true; >> + return *this; >> } >> >> - explicit operator bool() const { return hasVal; } >> - bool hasValue() const { return hasVal; } >> - const T *operator->() const { return getPointer(); } >> - T *operator->() { return getPointer(); } >> - const T &operator*() const LLVM_LVALUE_FUNCTION { >> - assert(hasVal); >> - return *getPointer(); >> + void...

...gt; >> + OptionalStorage &operator=(const T &y) { > >> + new (storage.buffer) T(y); > >> + hasVal = true; > >> + return *this; > >> } > >> > >> - explicit operator bool() const { return hasVal; } > >> - bool hasValue() const { return hasVal; } > >> - const T *operator->() const { return getPointer(); } > >> - T *operator->() { return getPointer(); } > >> - const T &operator*() const LLVM_LVALUE_FUNCTION { > >> - assert(hasVal); > >> - return *getPo...

Hi all!   My question is how to colour pixels by z value in persp plot in raster package. Here is an example:     x <- seq(-1.95, 1.95, length = 30) y <- seq(-1.95, 1.95, length = 35) z <- outer(x, y, function(a,b) a*b^2) r1 <- raster(nrows=35, ncols=30, xmn=0, xmx=30, ymn = 0, ymx = 35) r1[] <- c(z) persp(r1)   There already exist some function to produce persp plot for anothe

It seems MemorySSA.cpp is the only real code where we found the problem happening. Is it possible to change the source of MemorySSA.cpp to hide the problem and buy some time for now? Now we use an empty generic_def_path_iterator with Optional<ListIndex> N being initialized by None as the end of range. Can we initialize the Optional var with a special value instead of None?

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

...ot provide access to the value, which is typically >>> R_UnboundValue. But this does not even need to be implemented with SYMSXP. >>> The design would allow something like: >>> >>> binding <- getBinding("x", env) >>> if (hasValue(binding)) { >>> x <- value(binding) # throws an error if none >>> message(name(binding), "has value", x) >>> } >>> >>> That I think it is a bit verbose but readable and could be made fast. And >>> I...

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

...or<Edge, 8> Edges; + argsToEdges(Analysis, &Inst, Edges); + + // In the case of an unused alloca (or similar), edges may be empty. Note + // that it exists so we can potentially answer NoAlias. + if (Edges.empty()) { + auto MaybeVal = getTargetValue(&Inst); + assert(MaybeVal.hasValue()); + auto *Target = *MaybeVal; + findOrInsertNode(Target); + return; + } - // In the case of an unused alloca (or similar), edges may be empty. Note - // that it exists so we can potentially answer NoAlias. - if (Edges.empty()) { - auto MaybeVal = getTargetValue(&...

...rse (name >> objects) but they do not provide access to the value, which is typically >> R_UnboundValue. But this does not even need to be implemented with SYMSXP. >> The design would allow something like: >> >> binding <- getBinding("x", env) >> if (hasValue(binding)) { >> x <- value(binding) # throws an error if none >> message(name(binding), "has value", x) >> } >> >> That I think it is a bit verbose but readable and could be made fast. And >> I >> think binding objects would be useful in other...

...value. We already have SYMSXPs at the R level of course (name objects) but they do not provide access to the value, which is typically R_UnboundValue. But this does not even need to be implemented with SYMSXP. The design would allow something like: binding <- getBinding("x", env) if (hasValue(binding)) { x <- value(binding) # throws an error if none message(name(binding), "has value", x) } That I think it is a bit verbose but readable and could be made fast. And I think binding objects would be useful in other ways, as they are essentially a "named object". F...

...Ps at the R level of course (name > objects) but they do not provide access to the value, which is typically > R_UnboundValue. But this does not even need to be implemented with SYMSXP. > The design would allow something like: > > binding <- getBinding("x", env) > if (hasValue(binding)) { > x <- value(binding) # throws an error if none > message(name(binding), "has value", x) > } > > That I think it is a bit verbose but readable and could be made fast. And I > think binding objects would be useful in other ways, as they are > essential...

In November, we had a "bug repository conversation" with Peter Hagerty and myself: https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16065 where the bug report title started with --->> "exists" is a bottleneck for dispatch and package loading, ... Peter proposed an extra simplified and henc faster version of exists(), and I commented > --- Comment #2