search for: invesement

I am looking at getting a new Thinkpad with an i5 processor. I was curious to what extent this would speed up developing a Ruby on Rails app. I am guessing that this depends to what extent multi-threading is utilized, but I am not sure---hence the question :^) If it is not that significant, my other choice would be to get a used Thinkpad or Mac Pro, duo-core. So is there a significant

Hi! while trying to use llvm::DominatorTreeBase on a custom graph that has nothing to do with llvm::BasicBlock I ran into some difficulties, because llvm::DominatorTreeBase calls e.g. getParent()->front() directly on the nodes and uses llvm::Inverse which forced me to implement my GraphTraits also for Inverse. This could be solved using a compile time abstraction of Graph instread of

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote: > Hi! > > while trying to use llvm::DominatorTreeBase on a custom graph that > has nothing to do with llvm::BasicBlock I ran into some difficulties, > because llvm::DominatorTreeBase calls e.g. getParent()->front() > directly on the nodes and uses llvm::Inverse which forced me to >

Hallo, suppose I have a vector: x <- c(1,1,1,2,2,3,3,3,3,3,4) How can I generate a vector/sequence in which a fixed number of zeroes (say 3) is inserted between the consecutive values, so I get 1,1,1,0,0,0,2,2,0,0,0,3,3,3,3,3,0,0,0,4 thanks a lot, Serguei [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 04/07/2010 08:10 PM, Jochen Wilhelmy wrote: > Hi! > > while trying to use llvm::DominatorTreeBase on a custom graph that > has nothing to do with llvm::BasicBlock I ran into some difficulties, > because llvm::DominatorTreeBase calls e.g. getParent()->front() > directly on the nodes Yes this is a problem. However how is it related to your proposal? Do you want to add a