search for: over

...ing the archives (although I probably missed something in my search due to the search phrase). I estimated multinomial probabilities for some count data (number successful offspring) ranging from 0 to 8 (9 possible response categories). I constructed a barplot (using barplot2) and I want to "overlay" a normal distribution on the figure (using rnorm (1000, mean, sd)). My intent is to show that using a mean(and associated sd) estimated from discrete count data may not be a valid representation of the distribution of successful offspring. Obviously the x and y axes (as structured in b...

Why is it that @llvm.invariant.start requires the size argument to be a constant integer literal and does not accept constant expressions? For example the following IR: declare {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64,i8*) define void @foo() { %1 = call {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64 ptrtoint(i8* getelementptr(i8* %null, i32 1) to i64), i8* null) ret void } gives the following error from llvm-as:

Geoff Reedy wrote: > Why is it that @llvm.invariant.start requires the size argument to be a > constant integer literal and does not accept constant expressions? For > example the following IR: > > declare {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64,i8*) > define void @foo() { > %1 = call {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64 ptrtoint(i8* getelementptr(i8* > %null, i32 1) to i64), i8*

In DAGCombiner::MergeConsecutiveStores, there is this check: if (Index->getAlignment() != St->getAlignment()) break; Apparently this check ensures that all of the stores have the same alignment. Why is that necessary? This seems very overly restrictive to me. -David

...b4.conf configured this way (excerpt): > > vfs objects = shadow_copy2 zfsacl > shadow:snapdir = .zfs/snapshot > shadow:format = GMT-%Y.%m.%d-%H.%M.%S > shadow:sort = desc > > After updating the package to 4.1.22, which fixes several > vulnerabilities, I discovered that I could no longer view previous > versions of files or folders. > > Checking out the log with log level at 10, I found some error > messages, which indicates access to the snapdir, .zfs/snapshots, is > denied. > > Error messages: > > ../source3/modules/vfs_z...

Hi, I wonder how to override some tag generators, for example the hidden_field_tag function. By the way, I would be interested to learn how to extend ActionView::Base so new functions would be available to all my views (functions that need _erbout access, so a simple helper doesn''t...help) Thanks -- Posted...

Points, axes and axes labels on graphs printed from R are very light- almost unreadable. I am using the gui interface on the windows version to print the plot on the screen to an HP 8000 set as a postscript printer or PCL printer; the postscript output is light and the PCL output is very light. If I specify lwd =2 in the plot command, the lines are readable, but the points (open circles, in

These commands both work in Dovecot (as of 2.1.3): 1 UID FETCH 1:* () (CHANGEDSINCE 1) * 1 FETCH (UID 30097 MODSEQ (19554)) [...] 1 OK Fetch completed. 2 FETCH 1:* () (CHANGEDSINCE 1) * 2 FETCH (MODSEQ (19554)) [...] 2 OK Fetch completed. However, RFC 3501 indicates that an empty FETCH attribute list is incorrect: fetch = "FETCH" SP sequence-set SP ("ALL" /

Even for an extremely simple instance of a reference class x <- setRefClass("x") y <- x$new() calling the internal inspect function .Internal(inspect(y)) produces enough output that it takes several minutes to print to the console.? (Actually I gave up and terminated the command after ~10 mins.? It isn't clear whether the output would eventually complete.) Are reference

Hi, http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/aab9fbd6ffa0 from http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2008-07/msg00518.html restricts the CPUID masking feature to model 0x1d or model 0x17 with stepping >=4: if (!((model == 0x1d) || ((model == 0x17) && ((eax & 0xf) >= 4)))) { /* fail ... */ A Xeon E5520 which is supposed to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Folks, We are discussing removing the capability to chaining passdb backends. It's a decent idea but overly complicates things IMO and unless it has wide spread use, we'll probably axe it soon (voting is starting up on the samba-tecnnical ml now). To give you an example of what I mean, is anyone using something like: passdb backend = smbpasswd ldapsam If you haven't been using this type of...

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2599 Bug ID: 2599 Summary: Overly verbose partial authentication Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 7.2p1 Hardware: Other OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: ssh Assignee: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.o...

In re-factoring my optimx package, I'm finding that the pdf output has some lines that are outside the margins (and there are warnings in R CMD check optimx). Clearly I can fix this by editing the tex file that is generated, but the build infrastructure would still get things wrong in automatic processing. So that gives rise to 3 questions: 1) How do I adjust the DESCRIPTION file to avoid too

...ss this could work, this means that simplifylibcalls (and others) would check this instead of TargetLibraryInfo? Out of curiosity, how important is -fno-builtin-foo? Isn't it enough to just have -fno-builtin-foo disable *all* builtin optimizations for the unit of code being compiled? This is overly conservative - is that actually a problem for something? -Chris

Hi David, You are right. This check is overly restrictive. We can replace this check with code that uses the alignment of the first store. Thanks, Nadav On Nov 22, 2013, at 9:31 AM, dag at cray.com wrote: > In DAGCombiner::MergeConsecutiveStores, there is this check: > > if (Index->getAlignment() != St->getAlignment()...

...pens, woot. > I'm hoping the whole of TLI can disappear with the new attributes rewrite. :) >>> Out of curiosity, how important is -fno-builtin-foo? Isn't it enough to just have -fno-builtin-foo disable *all* builtin optimizations for the unit of code being compiled? This is overly conservative - is that actually a problem for something? >>> >> Being overly conservative will of course keep the correct semantics for the program. I suppose that there could be some people who have their own special version of a builtin that they want to use, but they don't...

Hi, I was looking into the implementation of TailRecursionElimination, and noticed that we have the constrain that if any call uses a local, even though it doesn't capture the local, it would still prohibit TCE. This contain seems unnecessary and overly limiting? Relevant code is here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/cbe77ca9bd05393b1df1abf016b01f44d1d10a49/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/TailRecursionElimination.cpp#L275 Looking through the tests that cover this scenario (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/e29874eaa04d24b8c67776bf5...

Hello everyone, I had a few questions that I have not been able to figure out despite a lot of reading. 1) Adding a title to a multiplot figure: If I plot multiple plots with >par(mfrow=c(2,6)) how do I add an overall title to the figure, not the individual plots? 2) Saving histories on the fly: Is there a .Rhistory equivalent to >save.image() ? I would like to be able to save the .RData and .Rhistory files and move to another machine. Right now I have to quit R which looses the plots I am working on....

...rk, this means that simplifylibcalls (and others) would check this instead of TargetLibraryInfo? > Yes. > Out of curiosity, how important is -fno-builtin-foo? Isn't it enough to just have -fno-builtin-foo disable *all* builtin optimizations for the unit of code being compiled? This is overly conservative - is that actually a problem for something? > Being overly conservative will of course keep the correct semantics for the program. I suppose that there could be some people who have their own special version of a builtin that they want to use, but they don't want all builtin...

...tLibraryInfo? >> > Yes. Sounds good, much of TLI can just disappear when this happens, woot. >> Out of curiosity, how important is -fno-builtin-foo? Isn't it enough to just have -fno-builtin-foo disable *all* builtin optimizations for the unit of code being compiled? This is overly conservative - is that actually a problem for something? >> > Being overly conservative will of course keep the correct semantics for the program. I suppose that there could be some people who have their own special version of a builtin that they want to use, but they don't want all...