search for: prinf

...d3<-c(ind3,j); foo[[j]]<-NULL;next} else { año<-floor(cont/12); mes<-(cont-12*año); a<-(1999+año); foo[[j]]<-ts(x[(cont):nrow(x),j],frequency=12,start=c(a,mes))}}; That's the first part, then ind4<-integer(); for (m in setdiff(diff,ind3)){ nn<-length(foo[[m]]); prinf<-median(foo[[m]][1:12]); prsup<-median(foo[[m]][(nn-12):nn]); if (xor((prsup/prinf)>s,(prinf/prsup)>s)) {ind4<-c(ind4,m)}}; crit3<<-ind4; So far so good (aparently). I mean, the "crit3" set it's ok. But, the next paragraph: ind5<-integer(); for (k in ind4...

...tput from dprintf(). I think I'm being lucky here! HP apparently provides the necessary glue. What would be the correct way to enable debugging under EFI? Normal printf output remains invisible, so DEBUG_STDIO doesn't work. If there is nothing yet, I think a wrapper around printf (and *prinf) is needed. This should [v]sprintf() to a buffer and then print the resulting buffer using APrint("%a", buffer) if EFI_BUILD is defined.

...ting a ton of codegen logic > to handle this. Maybe I'm not being very clear. I want this replacement to be done at the very last minute (before unreferenced functions are removed, of course). I only want to catch libgcc-ish functions. For example on the x86 (32) a function containing prinf() only needs __divdi3 and __moddi3. I'd like the code generator to do its magic until there is no more magic to do, and then replace any 64 bit divides with the function call, for example. Make sense? -Rich

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 8, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> This patch raises selected instructions to function calls. I've dome >> some preliminary testing and I works: > > Out of curiosity, why do you want this? > I do bitcode linking of a whole program, including the soft-float and other support routines that a

On Aug 8, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Aug 8, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This patch raises selected instructions to function calls. I've dome >>> some preliminary testing and I works: >> >> Out of curiosity, why do you want this? >> > > I

...t possible minute, right before isel, still has arbitrary precision integers. The right place to do something like this is in the code generator, which is where it happens. -Chris > > I only want to catch libgcc-ish functions. > > For example on the x86 (32) a function containing prinf() only needs > __divdi3 and __moddi3. > > I'd like the code generator to do its magic until there is no more > magic > to do, and then replace any 64 bit divides with the function call, for > example. > > Make sense? > > -Rich > > __________________________...

On 05-08-15 12:05, Gene Cumm wrote: > > I recompiled with this in mk/devel.mk <http://devel.mk>: > > GCCWARN += -DDEBUG_PORT=0x2f8 -DCORE_DEBUG=1 > > 0x2f8 is a BIOSism. Is this a problem? The example in the comments said 0x3f8 which is COM1.

...ion clients. Ports 0x3f8 and 0x2f8 are so hardwired into my brain from back in the old BBS-days that I did not expect them NOT to work. Apparently some firmware engineers have this problem too. ;-) >>>> > If there is nothing yet, I think a wrapper around printf > (and *prinf) is > needed. This should [v]sprintf() to a buffer and then print the > resulting buffer using APrint("%a", buffer) if EFI_BUILD is > defined. > <<< > It sounds logical. Even Print("%a", buf) would work. I first used APrint() because the form...

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:29:41PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Yes, or even how about this (not tried it): > > while (off <= h->endpages - 0x1000) { > ... > } In fact this doesn't work either :-( I'll have another look at this tomorrow morning. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and

...her look at this tomorrow morning. > > Rich. > Yep, GCC7 complains about that off could overflow over SIZE_MAX when incremented with 0x1000 and could cause infinite loop, i.e size_t off = SIZE_MAX - 50; size_t endpages = SIZE_MAX; off += 100; // off is now 50 if (off < endpages) prinf("off is still smaller!"); To prevent this the while loop could be written as: while (off + 0x1000 < off && off < h->endpages) { off += 0x1000; 

....e. same output as 'tester 2'. Does anybody know what I missed or mis-configured or if it is simply not supported (and if it is not, it is planned to be supported)? Thanks, Philippe. PS. As a side note, clang inappropriately 'optimize away' something like: int func1() { return prinf("loading the file\n"); } static int loader_1 = func1(); int loader_2 = func2(); where loading a shared library containing this file should lead to the string "loading file" being printed twice, while with clang it is printed only once (the static int ... is not executed). --...

>>> > On 05-08-15 12:05, Gene Cumm wrote: >> >>? > I recompiled with this in mk/devel.mk <http://devel.mk>: >>? >? GCCWARN += -DDEBUG_PORT=0x2f8 -DCORE_DEBUG=1 >> >> 0x2f8 is a BIOSism. > Is this a problem? The example in the comments said 0x3f8 which is COM1. It means that a BIOS IO port for a UART won't work for EFI.? No

...msvcrt: Implemented the _(w)getenv_s functions. msvcrt: For internal msvcrt use, added ability to grow automatically the size of the buffer in printf core engine. msvcrt: Implemented _vc(w)printf. msvcrt: Correctly manage va_list:s in vf(w)printf ny using auto-grow buffer in prinf engine. msvcrt: Use macro for parameters validation itoa_s (and update the tests as well). kernel32: Fixed regression with echoing input characters. Erich Hoover (2): include: Add IP_PKTINFO response structure. include: Add macros for retrieving control message headers. Er...