search for: krys

Dear R users, Simple question. Can anyone help with the code that would allow me to view only the variables who's correlation output is >0.8? This is the code I'm using to date >cor(data, method="spearman") Kind regards Krys -------------------------------------------- _________________________________________________________________ Save time by using Hotmail to access your other email accounts. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi, Sorry for my newbies questions... but here it is... My goal is to have a "shading language", it is very similar to the "C" language but with special tokens. I have a parser and a lexer done with Lex/bison, once I have lexed/parsed my "shading language" I must create 3 new "source code" in OpenCL. It mean that by example for the following : shader

I can't seem to find a direct answer. If I want to convert NVVM IR to PTX code, do I have to use libNVVM or can I use a publicly released version of LLVM? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130131/2067682b/attachment.html>

...TUS+DISTANCE however it appears DISTANCE is not significant at 95% confidence, see output quoted below. However, removing DISTANCE gives a higher AIC=433.5, therefore I will keep it in, but am confused as to what is adds to the model. Are the p values given in output to be taken lightly? Thanks Krys >model<-lmer(FOLLOW~MOVERSTATUS+DISTANCE+(1|DATE), REML=FALSE, family=binomial,data=m1) >model #Generalized linear mixed model fit by the Laplace approximation #Formula: FOLLOW ~ MOVERSTATUS + DISTANCE + (1 | DATE) # Data: m1 # AIC BIC logLik deviance #430.8 448.4 -211.4 422.8...

We would also like to clarify on the misconceptions around CFI Instructions: There are two things that need to be clarified here: 1) Extra CFI FDE entries for basic blocks does not mean more dynamic instructions are executed. In fact, they do not increase at all. Krys talked about this earlier. 2) We do deduplication of common static CFI instructions in the FDE and move it to the CIE . Hence, moving to a new basic block does not mean a completely new set of CFI instructions is executed. On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 7:24 PM Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google.com&...

...ike to clarify on the misconceptions around CFI Instructions: > > > > There are two things that need to be clarified here: > > > > 1) Extra CFI FDE entries for basic blocks does not mean more dynamic > > instructions are executed. In fact, they do not increase at all. Krys > > talked about this earlier. > > 2) We do deduplication of common static CFI instructions in the FDE > > and move it to the CIE . Hence, moving to a new basic block does not > > mean a completely new set of CFI instructions is executed. > > > > On Wed, Oct 2,...

I'm a bit confused by this subthread -- doesn't BOLT have the exact same CFI bloat issue? From my cursory reading of the propellor doc, the CFI duplication is _necessary_ to represent discontiguous functions, not anything particular to the way Propellor happens to generate those discontiguous functions. And emitting discontiguous functions is a fundamental goal of this, right? On Wed,

Is there large value from deferring the block ordering to link time? That is, does the block layout algorithm need to consider global layout issues when deciding which blocks to put together and which to relegate to the far-away part of the code? Or, could the propellor-optimized compile step instead split each function into only 2 pieces -- one containing an "optimally-ordered" set of

...bloats and binary size bloats. We would also like to clarify on the misconceptions around CFI Instructions: There are two things that need to be clarified here: 1) Extra CFI FDE entries for basic blocks does not mean more dynamic instructions are executed. In fact, they do not increase at all. Krys talked about this earlier. 2) We do deduplication of common static CFI instructions in the FDE and move it to the CIE . Hence, moving to a new basic block does not mean a completely new set of CFI instructions is executed. + C++ Exceptions and basic block sections for these: TLDR; This can be i...

Full_Name: Krzysztof Podgorski Version: R version 2.4.1 (2006-12-18) OS: Windows XP Submission from: (NULL) (130.235.3.79) The function ''det'' works improperly for a singular matrix and returns a non-zero value even if ''solve'' reports singularity. The matrix is very simple as shown below. A <- diag(rep(c(64,8), c(8,8))) A[9:16,1] <- 8 A[1,9:16] <- 8