search for: intertwin

I'm using an SVM as I've seen a paper that reported extremely good results. I'm not having such luck. I'm also interested in ideas for other approaches to the problem that can also be applied to general problems (no assuming that we're looking for spirals). Here is my code: library(mlbench) library(e1071) raw <- mlbench.spirals(194, 2) spiral <-

...partition for var, partition for home2, > partition for what ever. that model is not generally recommended anymore, at least not putting /usr on its own partition, there's just too many issues with that nowdays. I don't like putting /var in its own partition either as its all too intertwined with root. the problem with lots of little partitions is your freespace gets fragmented. /home in a dedicated partition, sure. /var/lib/${DATABASE_OR_WEB_SERVER}, ditto... -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

Hi. I'm trying to plot a pair of intertwined spirals and an svm that separates them. I'm having some trouble. Here's what I tried. > library(mlbench) > library(e1071) Loading required package: class > raw <- mlbench.spirals(200,2) > spiral <- data.frame(class=as.factor(raw$classes), x=raw$x[,1], y=raw$x[,2]) >...

...up here as its not a transfer. If you look at the block as a whole you can see what is going on. However if you look at the line that says "deleting rsync-test/jj.kk". This line does not supply a context of its operation. So if multiple clients are operating then these lines can become intertwined and the contexts lost. So what I mean in atomicity is if a client starts a session can I trust the log lines to provide a context or will everything be intertwined? We are using rsync in daemon mode thanks Doug -- What profits a man if he gains the whole world yet loses his soul? -----------...

Is there are description somewhere of how CELT packs into the .oga file? Trying to reverse engineer it from the intertwined celtenc code is suboptimal. -a

...and disallowed for the "listen on rsync's port" mode of operation. I would like to use SSH to authenticate users and grant access to the machine, leaving more specific rights management to the configuration of individual services. With rsync, these functions appear to be a bit more intertwined than they have to be. If people think this is a good idea, (especially the "owners" of rsync), I would be happy to revise the code to make it work. Let me know at larry nospacehere brasfield at m s n dot com and I will post the results to this list/thread after a week or so. -- Lar...

...l of this will require a reasonable amount of cleanup across the projects which I'm happy to do prior to flipping defaults around. Thoughts? Any concerns or objections? (I'll ask the same question and ofter to either enact the cleanups or toggle the warning(s) back off for each of the less intertwined subprojects like LLD, LLDB, Polly, etc.) -Chandler -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150718/605a59a1/attachment.html>

...tition for what ever. >> >> >> that model is not generally recommended anymore, at least not putting >> /usr on its own partition, there's just too many issues with that >> nowdays. I don't like putting /var in its own partition either as its >> all too intertwined with root. the problem with lots of little >> partitions is your freespace gets fragmented. >> >> /home in a dedicated partition, sure. >> /var/lib/${DATABASE_OR_WEB_SERVER}, ditto... > > The real issue is that you cannot put /usr on a dedicated partition > any...

Hi All! I have the question, why reverted the ICH10 support from 7.1? This is the svn commit: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/releng/?pathrev=186551 What is the PR number of the base of this commit or what is the problem description? I have a motherboard with ich10r with 3 sata2 disc (hitachi) + 1 sata dvd-rw (samsung), without any problem. Sorry for bad spelling or english

...>> architecture has been a very natural fit for this concept from our >> perspective. > > It is appealing, but it is wrong. Constant should really only model primitive constants (ConstantInt/FP, etc) and we should have one more form for “relocatable” constants. Instead, we have intertwined constant folding and ConstantExpr logic that doesn’t make sense. > > A better pattern to follow are intrinsics like (e.g.) llvm.coro.size.i32(), which always returns a constant value. Ok, we'll investigate this issue further. > >>> Ok, that sounds complicated, but can surely...

My 2c... Even though I understand it might be way off in the future, but we are talking about long term plans here anyway. Also as a VLIW backend maintainer, I just have to say it :) - We do need to have a way to assign bundles much earlier than we do now. And it needs to be intertwined with scheduling (Bundler currently reuses a good chunk of scheduler infrastructure). It is also obvious that it will have adverse effect on all the downstream passes. It is further insulting due to the fact that bundling is trivial to do during scheduling, but it goes hard against the original as...

...a frontend which depends on LLVM. It is a goal of Zig to keep the bootstrapping process to a minimum number of steps (See https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/issues/853). However, we will always depend on LLVM, Clang, and LLD. So that means the bootstrapping process of these 3 projects are inherently intertwined. From the perspective of bootstrapping, ability to build with older compilers is better. On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:21 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:10 PM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote: > >&g...

Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> writes: > - We do need to have a way to assign bundles much earlier than we do now. Yeah, I can imagine why this would be useful. > And it needs to be intertwined with scheduling (Bundler currently reuses a > good chunk of scheduler infrastructure). Just to clarify, is the need due to the current bundling implementation of reusing scheduler infrastructure or is there a more fundamental reason the two should be tied together? I can imagine some advant...

Hi, I just found out that ZFS triggers a kernel-panic while switching a mounted volume into read-only mode: The system is attached to a Symmetrix, all zfs-io goes through Powerpath: I ran some io-intensive stuff on /tank/foo and switched the device into read-only mode at the same time (symrdf -g bar failover -establish). ZFS went ''bam'' and triggered a Panic: WARNING: /pci at

En r?ponse ? Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org>: > BSD licensing has been demonstrated to work in practice, for similar > applications, by a number of high-profile projects, including those > associated with Xiph.org. I believe that in these situations, the In the case of hardware support, the benefits are still not there. > freedom > and continued viability of the software

Hi Mehdi, I really like your idea of having a few "projected" git repositories (i.e. capture all commits that touch llvm/ into llvm.git, all that touch clang/ to clang.git etc.). I think it should solve our problem of llvm-forks-with-downstream changes very nicely (I think we won't have to do anything, as you said). I still want to sleep on it to see if I can spot any issues.

...can't simply copy that IR while inlining and expect things to still work, because the operation of Unwind_Resume depends on what stack frame it's in. I don't agree that the inlined version is correct IR. The 'invoke semantics' you're talking about are inextricably intertwined with _Unwind_Resume's semantics. > However if you add a catch-all to the selector instead: > %eh_select8.i = tail call i32 (i8*, i8*, ...)* > @llvm.eh.selector.i32( i8* %eh_ptr.i, i8* bitcast (i32 (...)* > @__gxx_personality_v0 to i8*), i8* null) > then the unwinder...

...this respect. However, it's a functional programming language. 3. I'd like to do so in such as way to play off of the strengths of both approaches (I'll label one, "the computing with data approach", and the second, the "OOP" approach). 4. Note that there are two intertwined goals, here. First, I'd like to be able to use the strengths of S, in the sense of being able to provide the right thing for the right set of inputs, (i.e. "plot" does the right thing). So I'd like to continue to have this interactive strength. Second, I'd like to be abl...

On 01/13/2017 10:19 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi Catello, > > LLVM does have a "loop idiom recognition" pass which, in principle, > does exactly that kind of a thing: it recognizes loops that perform > memcpy/memset operations. It does not recognize any target-specific > idioms though and there isn't really much in it that would make such

...> > Essentially if the projects are supposed to be separate modules, then submodules is the solution to enforce that independence, ensuring commits in each module only affect that module and have appropriate commit messages for that context. > > If the submodules are in practice more intertwined then that then it does feel like an ideologically pure solution that in the end just gets in the way of developer productivity. > > Ive got a setup here that uses a hierarchy of submodules, so there is a combined submodule that just ensures that its children (other submodules) are at mutua...