search for: remodeling

Hello all, I am really excited to post these new patches since a lot of things have been done to the software lately. I know, I still have to write a README file but I am struggling to get a "basic" functional version out before I can concentrate efforts on documentation (I know, not the best practice). Anyway, here we go with the diffs and its comments: * MediaInfo.py.diff

HI I use glm in R to do logistic regression. and treat both response and predictor as factor In my first try: ******************************************************************************* Call: glm(formula = as.factor(diagnostic) ~ as.factor(7161521) + as.factor(2281517), family = binomial()) Deviance Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -1.5370 -1.0431 -0.9416 1.3065 1.4331 Coefficients:

..."call $dst", []> { bits<30> disp; let op = 1; let Inst{29-0} = disp; } The Uses=[O0,O1,O2,O3,O4,O5] is causing this crash (and similar crashes in the PQBP and Greedy allocators if I remember right). I fixed this in the MicroBlaze backend by remodeling the call instructions to be variadic like other backends. See the MBlazeInstrInfo.td changes in this commit: http://www.llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=rev&revision=121994 NOTE: In the commit R1 is the dedicated stack register on the MicroBlaze architecture. -- Wesley Peck University of Kan...

I''ve inherited an EAV database and there''s really no option to remodel it. Data is stored as key_name, key_value pairs Trying to return a meaningful, unified recordset is far too complex to be efficient. I''ve decided to make use of the MySQL GROUP_CONCAT, and CONCAT_WS functions to return a fast query result, with the consolidated fields as one string. The final data is

Hello, When I run LLC with option "-O0 -march=sparc" on following testcase, fast register allocator crashes with "UNREACHABLE executed" error. LLC generates code successfully with other standard register allocators available. $ cat call.ll define void @test() nounwind { entry: %0 = tail call i32 (...)* @foo() nounwind tail call void (...)* @bar() nounwind ret void }

> > This seems fine to me. The optimizer can (soundly) conclude that %p is > dead after the "lifetime.end" (for the two instructions), and dead before > the "lifetime.start" (for the *single* instruction in that basic block, > *not* for the previous BB). This seems like the proper result for this > example, am I missing something? > What if I put that in

...of a higher level IR towards a machine representation; that is a different goal and comes with various things (pseudo instructions, virtual register management, stack frame management, etc.) that don’t help for this use case and rather have the potential to be in the way... I’d rather work towards remodeling the code/datastructures to make reuse in llvm-mca simpler where it makes sense. - Matthias > On Mar 2, 2018, at 9:33 AM, Andrew Trick via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > +Ahmed > >> On Mar 2, 2018, at 6:42 AM, Andrea Di Biagio <andrea.dibiagio at gmai...

...ember With New High Performance Rink System LYNNWOOD -- A new ice arena will open in Lynnwood Sept. 15, about four months after the SnoKing Ice Arena closed. Washington Ice Skating Association, which owns both the former SnoKing rink and the Olympicview private ice rink in Mountlake Terrace, is remodeling and reopening the rink as the Lynnwood Ice Center. The new ice center will be in the renovated SnoKing building at 19803 68th Ave. W. After 20-plus years of being open to the public, the SnoKing Ice Arena closed suddenly at the end of March. Former SnoKing manager Doug Stewart said they left be...

Hi, Is it possible to have an array as the output of a custom fact? And then to pass it into a template in Puppet? I currently have a fact that looks like this: Facter.add("exports") do setcode do case Facter.hostname when (/thishost/i): [ "/local", "/local2" ] end end end & a template like this: <%

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:44 AM, John McCall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Matthias Braun <matze at braunis.de <mailto:matze at braunis.de>> wrote: >> My two cents: >> >> - I think inline assembly should work even if the compiler cannot parse the contents. This would rule out msvc inline assembly

On 5 November 2014 11:51, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Reid Kleckner" <rnk at google.com> > > To: "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> > > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 12:54:30 PM >

Is there a condition test to see if a file exists on the puppetmaster? I have about 15 different license files that are loaded on thirteen servers. Not every license goes on every server. I''d like to serve the files only if they exist on the puppet master server. I''m thinking of doing it like this: define install_license($host) {

Hey everyone, I have again a loop question: After generating the dataset using Jan?s approach from my previous posting (http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Loop-over-several-variables-td4648112.html) I want to rename the Variables in the new dataset so that all y will be called tiy. Doing it separately the following line works fine: ti<-rename (ti,c(y5="tiy5")) So I thought I simply

Hi everyone, I've only been using R for a week or so now, and am now required to work with some pretty mixed data at my hospital. Basically, we're looking to see if hypertension status (nominal) affects cardiac function (multiple & continuous). In order to do this, we've collected multiple echocardiograph data reports on each patient. 1. Each patient is coded either as 0 or 1

Hello there, I have come to a situation where I would like to mix 2 approaches to create the contents of a file. Here is what I have: a module ''sudo'' which manages a hosts /etc/sudoers file: init.pp: class sudo { case $operatingsystem { Debian: { package { "sudo": } } } file { "/etc/sudoers": mode => 440, content =>

Hello,I would like to know if there is residue analysis after the Cox model and make the adjustment for my random cluster? [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

After some through I have decided that I don''t want to keep all my configuration variables in LDAP; too many variables and the variables are too specific to manage efficiently. What I want to keep in ldap are some general class definitions, like samba-bdc, and samba-dev-shares, etc. So I build a manifest like the one below; but there are a few problems. First, I can''t be sure

On 5 November 2014 12:48, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Nick Lewycky" <nlewycky at google.com> > > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > > Cc: "Reid Kleckner" <rnk at google.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" < > llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > >

Hi I would really appreciate some help with my code for coxme... My data set I'm interested in survival of animals after an experiment with 4 treatments, which was performed on males and females. I also have two random factors: Response variable: survival (death) Factor 1: treatment (4 levels) Factor 2: sex (male / female) Random effects 1: person nested within day (2 people did

My two cents: - I think inline assembly should work even if the compiler cannot parse the contents. This would rule out msvc inline assembly (or alternatively put all the parsing and interpretation burden on the frontend), but would work with gcc asm goto which specifies possible targets separately. - Supporting control flow in inline assembly by allowing jumps out of an assembly block seems