search for: joergs

hi everybody, I noticed the following: in one of my scripts 'layout' is used to generate a (approx. square) grid of variable dimensions (depending on no. of input files). if the no. of subplots (grid cells) becomes moderately large (say > 9) I use a construct like ###layout grid computation and set up occurs here### ... opar <- par(no.readonly = T);

I raised this question quite some time ago but it quitly went down the river. I'll give it a second try (before keeping my modified version of matplot for ever...): matplot supports vectors (and/or character strings) for a number of arguments namely `type', `lty', `lwd', `pch', `col', `cex'. all of them act consistently in such a way that the first entries are used

I wants to start a win Prog called "Mathe Coach" with wine. And yes I know that there are ohter and better Progs for linux, but it has to be that one....not my decision :-) The occuring problem is that wine hangs in a loop and i can't make neither head nor tail of the debug messages (the file is over 10 MB large, and i abborted wine after a few seconds to avoid larger files) here a

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > >

Bringing this up on llvm-dev for more general attention. The problem here is two fold: (1) Reuse of enumeration values is just a major no-go. (2) I'm not sure why the existing vector types had to be killed completely. But something clearly has to be done here. This majorly affects e.g. Mesa. Joerg ----- Forwarded message from Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-commits <llvm-commits at

Regarding the numerical value of the LLVMTypeKind enum, my understanding is that LLVM-C does not promise to maintain ABI compatability between versions. If I am mistaken, I can fix this issue. From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of James Y Knight via llvm-dev Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 7:33 AM To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at bec.de>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > >

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 5:57 AM Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 08:06:11PM -0700, Tim Northover wrote: > > > mul can be inlined easily if necessary for arbitrary sizes, but div is > very expensive. > > > > Shall I file a bug for "implement FFT in LLVM"? > > I didn't say it is the most efficient

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 06:44:57PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > > wrote: > >

> De : Joerg Sonnenberger [mailto:joerg at britannica.bec.de] > > The basic idea is to still create a relocation on the MC level, but fix it up later. > You didn't say if your ISA is fixed or variable length, the former, can simplify > this quite bit. The constant island pass generally tries to address two issues: > (1) Merging of identical constants. > (2) Splitting the

Hello together i want to execute different commands that are saved in strings (eg: "d <- 4+7" and some more complicated things). How can i execute/evaluate them. I know i could save them to a temp-file a read this with source. But is there a way without a file in the middle? I know also the 'assign' command but I think it would only the simply cases. thanks and gruess joerg

Thanks Joerg. I've made the change you suggested and verified that it still works. I think the noinline is still required though as this function can be called from a couple of places and gdb will want to set its breakpoint on the single function address. Let me know if you think otherwise though. Cheers, Andrew On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger < joerg at

> On May 2, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 02:39:12PM -0700, Quentin Colombet wrote: >> Hi Joerg, >> >>> On May 2, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 01:35:27PM -0700,

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > > wrote: > >

Hi Rafael, comment explanation added now. Thanks. On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > LGTM with a comment explaining the issue. > > On 20 December 2013 03:50, Andrew MacPherson <andrew.macp at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thanks Joerg. > > > > I've made the change you suggested and verified that it

I have a loop that I iterate through in my view. <% coll.each do |itm| puts(itm.value) end %> How do I render the itm.value without using a <%= %> tag? Should puts not work? Joerg P.S. There is a good enough reason for me wanting to do this :-) -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 03:26:56PM +0000, Tim Northover wrote: > On 10 December 2013 15:00, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:26:53PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: > >> In a nutshell, it seems to be our consensus that the integrated > >> assembly can now be turned on by default on ARM, and we should add > >>

On 10 December 2013 15:00, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:26:53PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: >> In a nutshell, it seems to be our consensus that the integrated >> assembly can now be turned on by default on ARM, and we should add >> -no-integrated-as for the cases where it fails (like the kernel). > > It

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > Another difference from Memcheck is that we propose to use 8 shadow bits > > per byte of application memory and use a > > direct shadow mapping (for 64-bit linux that is just clearing 46-th bit > of >

Hi Joerg, > On May 2, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 01:35:27PM -0700, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev wrote: >> 1. Use [Fix] for commit related to bug fixes. > > I'm not really such a big fan of this format, adds too much noise. What alternatives do you have in mind? >