search for: prevailing

...internalize f and keep strongalias and weakalias as > aliases of f. > Good point on wanting function pointer equality. However, we can't simply internalize f(). We'll also need to rename the internalized copy. The reason is that we want the original f() references to resolve to the prevailing copy in the other module.Summarizing what we just talked about on IRC, when we have a non-prevailing weak/linkonce symbol f() that has an alias point to it, we need to: 1) Rename and internalize f() 2) Create a new external decl f() 3) RAUW existing references (other than from the aliases) with the...

...vila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > > I was wondering though what happens if we have an alias, which may or may > > not be weak itself, to a non-odr weak symbol that isn't prevailing. In > that > > case, do we eventually want references via the alias to go to the > > prevailing copy (in another module), or to the original copy in the > alias's > > module? I looked at some examples without ThinLTO, and am a little > > confused. Current (non-Thin...

...to handle the weak symbol cases we discussed in IRC earlier this week in the context of D28523. I was going to implement the support for turning aliases into copies in order to enable performing thinLTOResolveWeakForLinkerGUID on both aliases and aliasees, as a first step to being able to drop non-prevailing weak symbols in ThinLTO backends. I was wondering though what happens if we have an alias, which may or may not be weak itself, to a non-odr weak symbol that isn't prevailing. In that case, do we eventually want references via the alias to go to the prevailing copy (in another module), or to t...

...gt;> >>> 2) In the proposed canonical form this becomes: >>> define private void @0() { ... } >>> @a = linkonce_odr alias void (), void ()* @0 >>> @b = linkonce_odr alias void (), void ()* @0 >>> >>> And let's say @a and @b are both non-prevailing in this module. I think we lose inlining ability for these functions when we start dropping non-prevailing copies. >>> >>> In 1) we could transform this (as described in my earlier email) to: >>> >>> define available_externally void @a() { ... } >>> /*...

...I want to move the summary into the irsymtab that we will be >> storing to disk after D32061 lands. This would help solve a number of >> problems: >> - To read a summary, you need to read all summaries in a module. For >> example, if a client only wants to read summaries for prevailing symbols, >> it still needs to read summaries for all symbols. We should be able to >> design an API that lets clients avoid reading summaries for known >> non-prevailing symbols. >> > > Why should we? Efficiency? > Where in the process would we benefit from that? &g...

...> @b = linkonce_odr alias void (), void ()* @a > > 2) In the proposed canonical form this becomes: > define private void @0() { ... } > @a = linkonce_odr alias void (), void ()* @0 > @b = linkonce_odr alias void (), void ()* @0 > > And let's say @a and @b are both non-prevailing in this module. I think we lose inlining ability for these functions when we start dropping non-prevailing copies. > > In 1) we could transform this (as described in my earlier email) to: > > define available_externally void @a() { ... } > /* RAUW @b with @a */ > > and we ca...

...to handle the weak symbol cases we discussed in IRC earlier this week in the context of D28523. I was going to implement the support for turning aliases into copies in order to enable performing thinLTOResolveWeakForLinkerGUID on both aliases and aliasees, as a first step to being able to drop non-prevailing weak symbols in ThinLTO backends. > > I was wondering though what happens if we have an alias, which may or may not be weak itself, to a non-odr weak symbol that isn't prevailing. In that case, do we eventually want references via the alias to go to the prevailing copy (in another module...

I was hoping for some advice regarding indexing, From a dataframe there are 27 variables of interest, with the prefix of "pre". [7] "Decision" "MHCDate" "pre01" "pre01111" "pre012" "pre013" [13] "pre02" "pre02111" "pre02114" "pre0211" "pre0212"

...matter, as the linker ignores the COMDAT groups. However, it might be nice to strip the COMDAT group early in module linking since we know we won't need them. Do other linkers that use the LTO api also resolve COMDAT symbols to the LTO definition? Would it be possible to drop COMDAT groups for prevailing symbols, at least when linking with the gold plugin? - stephen

...ate direction with this. Basically I want to move the summary into the irsymtab that we will be storing to disk after D32061 lands. This would help solve a number of problems: - To read a summary, you need to read all summaries in a module. For example, if a client only wants to read summaries for prevailing symbols, it still needs to read summaries for all symbols. We should be able to design an API that lets clients avoid reading summaries for known non-prevailing symbols. - Regular LTO modules do not have summaries. This means that dead stripping is less effective if the module contains both regular...

...is always the case. > > > If this also applies to the > > non-comdat case, I'm not sure how this works in the following situation > > (copied from an example in my response just now to pcc): > > > > If a module contains the following, and both @x and @y are non-prevailing > > in that module: > > > > @x = weak global ... > > @y = weak alias @x > > > > and the prevailing def for @x is in moduleX with a different value than > the > > prevailing def for @y which comes from moduleY. Just because they are > > aliased in t...

All, I''ve heard recently about has_many :through as a necessary alternative to HABTM (when the join table has it''s own id column, say, in a legacy schema). However, is the prevailing Rails wisdom now that one should use has_many :through in _all_ cases? If so, why? Thanks, Wes -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

The problem is that ThinLTO is not dropping the non-prevailing definitions, and they end up being emitted into the object file for b.o. $ ../ra/bin/llvm-dis -o - b.o0.0.preopt.bc | grep __llvm_prof $__llvm_profile_raw_version = comdat any $__llvm_profile_filename = comdat any @__llvm_profile_raw_version = constant i64 72057594037927940, comdat @__llvm_profile...

...ical IDs in the same document: error. Optional, of course. But handy! * New Markaby::Fragment class adds much flexibility. If it discovers you are using a tag as a string, the tag is removed from the stream. (<tt>div { strong("Real") + " Giraffes" }</tt>) * The prevailing rule now is: if you want it escaped, pass it to a block. If not, pass it as an arg. * Again, escaped: <tt>h1("Me & You Have a Giraffe")</tt> * And, not escaped: <tt>h1 { "<a href=''/''>Home</a>" }</tt> * Less method_missin...

...further cleanup is required in the code or in the tests. But if Teresa or you cannot get to it, I can, with some help, take a crack at fixing the tests. On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:26 AM Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > The problem is that ThinLTO is not dropping the non-prevailing > definitions, and they end up being emitted into the object file for b.o. > > $ ../ra/bin/llvm-dis -o - b.o0.0.preopt.bc | grep __llvm_prof > $__llvm_profile_raw_version = comdat any > $__llvm_profile_filename = comdat any > @__llvm_profile_raw_version = constant i64 720575940379...

Adding Peter to comment on the linker resolution issue. >From adding save-temps, it looks like lld and gold are giving different resolutions to the symbols, which is presumably creating this issue: (first file is with lld and second is with gold) $ diff a.out.resolution.txt gold/ 4c4 < -r=a.o,__llvm_profile_raw_version,plx --- > -r=a.o,__llvm_profile_raw_version,l 8,9c8,9 <

...nd data. I have the season, frequency, strength and direction of the wind from 10 different locations, the coverage of the area that I am interested in is not 100% there are small gaps in my coverage due to the location of the weather stations. I am trying to create a series of wind maps e.g. the Prevailing Winds, the maximum seasonal wind, etc. Could any body recommend any R-packages that would cover this type problem/issue? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifi...

On 15 March 2015 at 15:06, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > I used to use CSE:, but have now switched to using [CSE] because that seems to be the prevailing convention (and is somewhat more visually distinctive). I think it makes sense to codify that convention, but not to require them. Sometimes, there is nothing appropriate to use. Sometimes, the first or second word of the commit message is naturally the same as what the title tag would be, and so i...

...son, frequency, strength and direction of the wind from 10 > different locations, the coverage of the area that I am interested in is > not 100% there are small gaps in my coverage due to the location of the > weather stations. > > I am trying to create a series of wind maps e.g. the Prevailing Winds, the > maximum seasonal wind, etc. > > Could any body recommend any R-packages that would cover this type > problem/issue? Hi David, While there are several packages that include plotting routines for wind roses, it looks to me as though you want to define a small number of vecto...

...s) of wind direction data. I am wanting to extract a matrix which contains data for all columns conditional on column 20 having a value of _either_ less than 45 or greater than 315. (ie I want to extract a matrix which contains wind direction data for all columns {weather stations} when there is a prevailing northerly wind for one of the stations). I have tried a few different methods of doing this, none with any success, can anyone please advise? Thanks in advance!