search for: new_inst

...m-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I'm trying to add a new instruction after a given instruction in a basic >> block. >> Until LLVM 3.7, I was using the following code: >> >> BB->getInstList().insertAfter(I, new_inst); >> [where both I and new_inst are Instruction*] >> >> In LLVM 3.8 however, the SymbolTableList was created as a wrapper over >> iplist. >> Could anyone please tell me how I can do the same type of insertion in >> LLVM 3.8? >> > > auto Insert...

Why not just use Instruction::insertAfter()? I->insertAfter(new_inst); On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Try incrementing the iterator before using. > > On Sep 5, 2016 10:26, "Simona Simona via llvm-dev" < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 5...

Hello, I'm trying to add a new instruction after a given instruction in a basic block. Until LLVM 3.7, I was using the following code: BB->getInstList().insertAfter(I, new_inst); [where both I and new_inst are Instruction*] In LLVM 3.8 however, the SymbolTableList was created as a wrapper over iplist. Could anyone please tell me how I can do the same type of insertion in LLVM 3.8? Thank you and Regards, Simona -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachmen...

...>variable_referenced()); ir->rhs->accept(this); + this->precise = 0; r = this->result; l = get_assignment_lhs(ir->lhs, this, &dst_component); @@ -3233,7 +3282,8 @@ glsl_to_tgsi_visitor::visit(ir_assignment *ir) */ glsl_to_tgsi_instruction *inst, *new_inst; inst = (glsl_to_tgsi_instruction *)this->instructions.get_tail(); - new_inst = emit_asm(ir, inst->op, l, inst->src[0], inst->src[1], inst->src[2], inst->src[3]); + new_inst = emit_asm(ir, inst->op, l, inst->src[0], inst->src[1], inst->src[2], inst-&gt...

...4 classes. As the number of each class is not enough to obtain a good accuracy using some classifiers( svm, rna, knn) I need to "oversampling" the number of instances of each class. I have heard that there is a method to do this. It consists in generating these new instances as follows: new_instance <---- original_instance + u(epsilon) U(epsilon) is a uniform number in the range [-epsilon,epsilon] and this number is applied to each feature of the dataset to obtain a new instance without modified the original class. Anybody has used this method to "oversampling" his data? An...

Running Tomb Raider on Nouveau I found some flicker caused by ignoring precise modifiers on variables inside Nouveau. This series add precise/invariant handling to TGSI, which can be then used by drivers to disable certain unsafe optimisations which may otherwise alter calculations, which depend on having the same result across shaders. This series fixes this bug in Tomb Raider and one CTS test

In most of my tests I''d like to be able to stub out the observers for my models, but I''m not sure the best way to do this. I doesn''t look like there is a way to stub all instance methods, and I don''t seem to be able to stub early enough to stub out the observer as it''s instantiated. I can think of several hackish ways to get around it, but I was

...s is similar to the list of methods, but allows each defined method to have its own return value. flexmock.should_receive(:name => "John", :age => 32) * In addition to using a block for defining constrains, constraints may now be applied directly to the return value of +new_instances+. Combined with the expectation hashes supported by +should_receive+, simple mocking scenarios have become much more succinct. For example: flexmock(Person).new_instances.should_receive(:name => "John", :age => 32) * Improved implementation, allowing for more flexib...

In the console I see this behaviour: >> "19270412000000".to_date.methods => ["ns?", "mon", "ago", "end_of_month", "months_since", "default_inspect", "minus_without_duration", ... >> "19270412000000".to_date.class => Date >> "19270412000000".class => String >>