search for: pointertracker

...it wouldn''t let me respond that that thread (presumably because of it''s age). Rather than just throw it away, I figured I''d post it here in case in can help anyone else. I built a little class to help me do just that. Here is my implementation: (using Prototype 1.6) var pointerTracker = Class.create({ initialize: function(){ this.x = null; this.y = null; this.bodyEl = $(document.body); //Bind event listener. this.boundUpdatePosition = this.updatePosition.bindAsEventListener(this); this.start(); }, updatePosition: function(event){ this.x = event.pointerX(); t...

Hello LLVMers, I'm putting together some (extensive) experiments with using a genetic algorithm to construct sets of optimization passes that are as close as optimal in a number of ways, e.g. compilation time, execution time, code size, ... I've figured out which LLVM tools I should use for this (llvm-gcc to obtain bitcode, opt to optimize, llc to obtain assembly, ...), and I'm now

Dear Kenneth, May I ask you if you are implementing your search within ctuning framework: ctuning.org/ctuning-cc? The thing is that I use it since some time for my thesis to optimize code size and compilation time and run time with GCC though they are not using genetic algorithms but some slower hybrid of random exploration and than AI with some fronteer detection. Since recent version can be

On Jul 6, 2010, at 10:09 AM, Manuel Llosa wrote: > Dear Kenneth, May I ask you if you are implementing your search within > ctuning framework: ctuning.org/ctuning-cc? No, I'm not. I've built my own framework, and since I don't have any experience with the ctuning framework, I don't intend to start using that. There's little gain in it for me. > The thing is that I

Dear Kenneth, I see. Do you plan sharing your framework in open source? For now, I will continue using ctuning tools (they support LLVM as is but not some specific things on JIT dynamic recompilation what is my thesis about). I will like to compare all tools of course and will be happy to share results although real not until autumn).Look forward to your results and hopefully keep in touch.

On Jul 6, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Manuel Llosa wrote: > Dear Kenneth, I see. Do you plan sharing your framework in open source? > For now, I will continue using ctuning tools (they support LLVM as is but not > some specific things on JIT dynamic recompilation what is my thesis about). > I will like to compare all tools of course and will be happy > to share results although real not

Sorry for the rapid fire replies, but this configuration works for me: install(DIRECTORY include/ DESTINATION include # FILES_MATCHING PATTERN "*.def" PATTERN "*.h" PATTERN "*.td" PATTERN "*.inc" PATTERN ".svn" EXCLUDE ) install(DIRECTORY ${CMAKE_CURRENT_BINARY_DIR}/include/ DESTINATION include # FILES_MATCHING PATTERN

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Samuel Williams <space.ship.traveller at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I might just be doing something stupid, but when I do > > $ cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/llvm-2.8 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release .. > $ sudo make install > > I don't get the expected headers in >        /usr/local/llvm-2.8/include/llvm > > It is

Hi, I might just be doing something stupid, but when I do $ cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/llvm-2.8 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release .. $ sudo make install I don't get the expected headers in /usr/local/llvm-2.8/include/llvm It is simply an empty directory. What am I doing wrong? This is on Mac OS X, CMake 2.8+ Kind regards, Samuel