search for: move_s

Hi everyone, I have an idea that should allow reducing code duplication in Casting.h while making llvm::isa, llvm::cast, llvm::dyn_cast, etc more generic. Since we added unique pointers support for these template functions (see ab480f45cd23c08cb9aa3f427aad072df249135f) I propose to generalize their semantics to deal with any pointer-like type (i.e. dereferenceable and implicitly convertible to

Hello, klibc-1.4 and klibc-1.4.29 don't export the creat function: $ klcc -static -s -Wall rtfs.c -o rtfs rtfs.c: In function 'move_ent': rtfs.c:318: warning: implicit declaration of function 'creat' rtfs.o: In function `move_ent': rtfs.c:318: undefined reference to `creat' $ grep creat\\b /usr/lib/klibc/include/ -r /usr/lib/klibc/include/zlib.h: descriptors are

...ther the list with silly questions like this one? Thanks, cjf list( move_n = structure(.Data=c(0.984,0.016, 0.000, 0.081, 0.904, 0.015, 0.000, 0.026, 0.974, 0.974, 0.026, 0.000, 0.052, 0.930, 0.018, 0.000, 0.014, 0.986), .Dim=c(3,3,2)), move_s = structure(.Data=c(0.506, 0.214, 0.280, 0.048, 0.689, 0.263, 0.002, 0.914, 0.084, 0.451, 0.262, 0.287, 0.062, 0.686, 0.252, 0.002, 0.890, 0.108), .Dim=c(3,3,2)), fidel = structure(.Data=c(0.890, 0.055, 0.055, 0.065, 0.870, 0.065, 0.060, 0.060, 0.880, 0.88, 0.06, 0.06, 0.07,...

Looks pretty reasonable to me - with test cases. (not sure if dereferenced_type should be defined for a type that's not dereferenceable, though?) On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:02 AM Dmitriy Borisenkov via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have an idea that should allow reducing code duplication in Casting.h > while making llvm::isa, llvm::cast,

Hello, I was using a bunch of cpios in initramfs as a working system, and wondering why the unused files weren't being paged out to swap. So I reread ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.txt and now I know. So I wrote the attached utility. It creates a tmpfs, moves all files on the initramfs, moves / and executes the real init. It works, even with hardlinks, but it isn't the correct approach. Have

Thanks Krzysztof. That's very helpful - I was missing the distinction between a register containing an undefined value and a register marked as containing an undefined value. Cheers! On 1/23/18, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Send llvm-dev mailing list submissions to > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,

Regarding the patches, there are two concerns AFAICT: 1. It’s a new instruction and as usual when introducing a new instruction it will require work for some time until most optimizations know about it, and to get rid of any potential perf regression. No big deal; we just need to do the work (and we have already done some of it). 2. The patch was written by a student, which may not have time to