search for: i_0

I have written test.ll as below and ran 'opt' on it as " opt -std-compile-opts test.ll -S -o -" . But the output shows that there is code motion around the barrier intrinsics. test.ll ------- ; ModuleID = 'test.bc' define void @test(i16* %I_0, i16* %I_1, i16* %I_2, i16* %I_3, i16* %O_0) { entry: %T_0 = load volatile i16* %I_0 %T_1 = load volatile i16* %I_1 %T_2 = load volatile i16* %I_2 %T_3 = load volatile i16* %I_3 call void @llvm.nvvm.barrier0() %T_5 = add i16 %T_1, %T_3 call void @llvm.nvvm.barrier0() %T_7 = mul i16...

is there any guarantee that the nvptx intrinsic "llvm.nvvm.barrier0" will not be moved around by opt ? In other words, can I expect all the instructions above "llvm.nvvm.barrier0" to remain above it and those below it to remain below, after all the opt passes are run ? If that is not the case, is there a way to define such an intrinsic ? Thanks. -------------- next part

...ot; Suppose an int value 'i' is computed by a lot of int variables that are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i points to p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) ? So in the transformation example, the result is different when we take %196 or %...

Great, thanks! How much work do you think it will take to bring it up to date with the LLVM IR, except *ignoring* first-class structs and arrays for now? I believe llvm-gcc does not generate those in most cases and we can do a lot without supporting those. What else is missing relative to the current LLVM IR? Thanks, --Vikram Associate Professor, Computer Science University of

hi all an integration problem. i would like an exact or good approximation for the following, but i do not want to use a computer. any suggestions: integral of exp(b*x)/sqrt(1-x^2) where "b" is a constant greater than or equal to 0 and the integral runs from 0 to 1 any help would be apreciated / allan

...e 'i'  is computed by a lot of int variables that > are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i > to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? > > If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = > i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean >  we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables > its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i > points to >       p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) >  ? > > So in the transformation example, the result is d...

...e 'i' is computed by a lot of int variables that > are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i > to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? > > If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = > i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean > we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables > its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i > points to > p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) > ? So, in your example, if you do: i1 = ptrtoint p1; i...

...mputed by a lot of int variables that >> are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i >> to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? >> >> If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = >> i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean >>  we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables >> its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i >> points to >>       p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) >>  ? >> >> So in the transformat...

...nt variables that >>> are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i >>> to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? >>> >>> If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = >>> i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean >>>  we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables >>> its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i >>> points to >>>       p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) >>>  ? >>> >&g...

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:10 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 4/4/2011 6:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal<arushi987 at gmail.com> >>  wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> Is it correct to convert, >>>>   %196 = load i32* %195, align 8                

...ucing > multiple graphs within a "for" loop. For some strange reason, the > plotting routine always stops once lm(y~x) encounters more than one > missing value (I have marked the important bit with "***********"): > > par(mfrow=c(5,5)) > p_seq(3,122,2) > i_0 > k_0 > number_0 > for (i in p) { > j_foranalysis[93:174,i+1] > k_foranalysis[93:174,i] > df_data.frame(j,k) > mainlab1_substring(names(foranalysis[i]),2,8) > mainlab2_"; corr.:" > mainlab3_round(cor(j,k,na.method="available"),4) &g...

...t;>>> are converted from ptr (p1,p2...pn) by ptrtoint, then if we inttoptr i >>>> to a point p, how should I decide which pointer value the 'p' forms? >>>> >>>> If those p_j are ptrtoint to a i_j, and the computation for i is i = >>>> i_0 + i_1 + ... i_n, does it mean >>>>  we can take either p_j as a base pointer, and other int variables >>>> its offset, say we take p_2 as the base pointer, and the p from i >>>> points to >>>>       p_2 + (i_0 + i_1 + i_3 + .. i_n) >>>>  ?...

On 4/4/2011 6:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal<arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Is it correct to convert, >>> %196 = load i32* %195, align 8 ;<i32> [#uses=1] >>> %197 = zext i32 %196 to i64 ;<i64> [#uses=1] >>> %198 =

...n(facvec,base.lm){ if ( missing(facvec) || missing(base.lm) ){ cat("This script assesses the contribution of terms in a lm model.\n") cat(" It expects a vector of names and a lm.object to update.\n") cat(" as in script.name(facvec,base.lm).\n") stop() } a_0 i_0 base.r2_summary(base.lm)$r.squared for (i in 1:length(facvec)){ a[i]_c(fac=summary(update(base.lm,.~.+as.name(facvec[i])))$r.squared-base.r2) i_i+1 } return(a) } Thanks for any help, adrian acuster at nature.berkeley.edu -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-....

Hi all, I am wondering if this is a bug in the Matrix package or if it something that I am just getting wrong...here is an example: > m = matrix(0,4,4) > dimnames(m) = list(letters[1:4], letters[5:8]) > r = c("a","b","a","d") > m[r,2] = 1 > m e f g h a 0 1 0 0 b 0 1 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 d 0 1 0 0 > M = Matrix(0,4,4) > dimnames(M) =

Hello! I am having an issue with the OrgMassSpecR package. I run my HPLC using a DAD detector. My raw data is exported form chemstation as a csv file. I then upload the csv into Rstudio no problem. Using the DrawChromatogram function, I get a nice chromatogram, and my retention time, peak area, and apex intensity values are given as well. The problem comes with the peak area value given. The