search for: isume

Hi, I want to edit LLVM generated IR file, like as given below, Original LLVM IR file, @.str2 = private unnamed_addr constant [17 x i8] c"\0AI am in one_11\0A\00", align 1 ; Function Attrs: nounwind define i32 @one_1(i32 %ivar1, i32 %ivar2) #0 { entry: %ivar1.addr = alloca i32, align 4 %ivar2.addr = alloca i32, align 4 %isum = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 %ivar1, i32*

Hi, I want to call/add some functions(that defined in another file) on top of some functions, and reflect the same changes in object file. No, I am not looking for contractor. Thanks, Deepika On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:04 PM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: > What is the condition for adding this code? > > What have you tried so far? [Or are you looking for a

Hi, Yes I am looking for IR pass that will do insert call of functions that defined in another file. Links/suggestions that guide me to start for adding IR pass will help me so much. Regards, Deepika On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:03 PM, mats petersson <mats at planetcatfish.com> wrote: > So how do you know what you want to modify (conceptually)? > > Have you got a IR pass that you

Full_Name: Jeff Hallman Version: 2.0 OS: Linux Submission from: (NULL) (132.200.32.34) The function findGeneric() in the utils namespace contains this internal function: isUME <- function(e) { if (is.call(e) && (is.name(e[[1]]) || is.character(e[[1]]))) { switch(as.character(e[[1]]), UseMethod = as.character(e[[2]]), "{" = isUMEbrace(e), "if" = isUMEif(e), "") } else "&quot...

Hi, My requirement is something like as given below, a.c => a.obj contains a1() and a2() function b.c => b.obj contains b1() and b2() function main.c => main.obj call to a1, a2, b1, b2 Now, I want to move a1(), a2() from a.obj to b2.obj and on top of function b1() When I call b1() from main, it should call first a1, a2 and then function definition of b1 Can you please give me some

...rian Ripley <ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > > br> The issue is the use of UseMethod(), which you claim to be valid. As it > br> is inconsistent with the prime documentation, the help page, I would > br> question if it is `perfectly legal'. I expect the author of isUME > br> implemented the behaviour described on the help page. > > br> It is documented in S-PLUS as *strongly discouraged*, and although it is > br> documented in R-lang, I believe the right thing to do is to make the code > br> agree with the prime documentation. >...

Hi, Please consider the following : > x = as.integer(2^30-1) [1] 1073741823 > sum(c(rep(x, 10000000), rep(-x,9999999))) [1] 1073741824 Tested on 2.15.2 and a recent R-devel (r62132). I'm wondering if s in isum could be LDOUBLE instead of double, like rsum, to fix this edge case? https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/main/summary.c Thanks, Matthew

I am trying to call a FORTRAN subroutine from R. is.loaded is turning out to be TRUE. However when I run my .Fortran command I get the following error: Error in .Fortran("VALUEAHROPTIMIZE", as.double(ahrArray), as.double(kwArray), : Fortran symbol name "valueahroptimize" not in load table I have given the FORTRAN declaration below: subroutine VALUEAHROPTIMIZE(AHR,

I am trying to call a FORTRAN subroutine from R. is.loaded is turning out to be TRUE. However when I run my .Fortran command I get the following error: Error in .Fortran("VALUEAHROPTIMIZE", as.double(ahrArray), as.double(kwArray), : Fortran symbol name "valueahroptimize" not in load table I have given the FORTRAN declaration below: subroutine VALUEAHROPTIMIZE(AHR,

Just following up on this old thread since matrixStats 0.53.0 is now out, which supports this use case: > x <- rep(TRUE, times = 2^31) > y <- sum(x) > y [1] NA Warning message: In sum(x) : integer overflow - use sum(as.numeric(.)) > y <- matrixStats::sum2(x, mode = "double") > y [1] 2147483648 > str(y) num 2.15e+09 No coercion is taking place, so the

Hi Martin, Henrik, Thanks for the follow up. @Martin: I vote for 2) without *any* hesitation :-) (and uniformity could be restored at some point in the future by having prod(), rowSums(), colSums(), and others align with the behavior of length() and sum()) Cheers, H. On 01/27/2018 03:06 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>> Henrik Bengtsson <henrik.bengtsson at gmail.com>

>>>>> Henrik Bengtsson <henrik.bengtsson at gmail.com> >>>>> on Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:30:42 -0800 writes: > Just following up on this old thread since matrixStats 0.53.0 is now > out, which supports this use case: >> x <- rep(TRUE, times = 2^31) >> y <- sum(x) >> y > [1] NA > Warning message:

>>>>> Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> >>>>> on Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:45:44 +0200 writes: >>>>> Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fredhutch.org> >>>>> on Fri, 2 Jun 2017 04:05:15 -0700 writes: >> Hi, I have a long numeric vector 'xx' and I want to use >> sum() to count the number of

>>>>> Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fredhutch.org> >>>>> on Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:30:18 -0800 writes: > Hi Martin, Henrik, > Thanks for the follow up. > @Martin: I vote for 2) without *any* hesitation :-) > (and uniformity could be restored at some point in the > future by having prod(), rowSums(), colSums(), and others >