search for: resctricting

Hi Gurus! I have a job that is to get randomly samples from point-based GIS data (sp called shape GIS files) under the total sum resctricted. For example, I would like to take random smaples under the 1000 persons in each city. The randomly sampled persons should not be over 1000 any case. Thank you in advance, -- Kum-Hoe Hwang, Ph.D. Phone : 82-31-250-3283 Email : phdhwang@gmail.com

...user have only read access all is fine, also if I put it on a windows file server with same permissions it works. Samba 2.2.3 worked fine and I copied the share definitions accross and kept it unchanged. I tried it using linux filesystem permissions ony and also with ext set to chmod 777 and the resctricting it to read only using "read list" etc. When I create blank new excel workbooks in these shares it does the same. I tried it on various machines with w2k sp2, 3 and 4 using w2k prof, server and via terminal services. I've played around with mangling, default case, various locking op...

On Monday 06 October 2008 11:47, David Greene wrote: > > As far as the approach goes, here's a counterproposal that is a bit > > less complex. I suggest adding a single DenseMap<Instruction*, > > unsigned> to Mem2reg. If there is an entry in this map for a load/ > > store instruction, it would store the instruction's index in its basic > > block.

On Monday 20 October 2008 16:14, Chris Lattner wrote: > Ok, if you need this direction, just use an > std::vector<pair<unsigned,Instruction*>> as a forward map? You can do > fast binary searches in it. I don't see how that helps. I need a map from BasicBlock to a list of loads and stores. > > I suppose we could resctrict the map to containing only load and

On Oct 20, 2008, at 10:04 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Monday 06 October 2008 11:47, David Greene wrote: > >>> As far as the approach goes, here's a counterproposal that is a bit >>> less complex. I suggest adding a single DenseMap<Instruction*, >>> unsigned> to Mem2reg. If there is an entry in this map for a load/ >>> store instruction, it

On Oct 21, 2008, at 10:16 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Monday 20 October 2008 16:14, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> Ok, if you need this direction, just use an >> std::vector<pair<unsigned,Instruction*>> as a forward map? You can >> do >> fast binary searches in it. > > I don't see how that helps. I need a map from BasicBlock to a list > of

On Saturday 04 October 2008 17:05, Chris Lattner wrote: > Looking more closely at the approach, I infer that the (logical in > hindsight) issue are cases where mem2reg scans a BB to see the > relative ordering of two instructions. For example, the single store Correct. > case. I could imagine that if you saw lots of single store allocas in > the middle of a large BB that

Hi Frank, I'm not sure I completely understand what your delegating memory manager is doing, but I probably don't need to. If your primary objection is that you can't derive from the DefaultJITMemoryManager then I personally wouldn't object to your submitting a patch to make that accessible as a base class. The future path for JIT and MCJIT is under debate. A few of us would

It seems wrong to delegate a dozen or more methods when I only want to change the behavior in a couple small ways. It would have been easier to derive a class, but the base class is inaccessible (in an anonymous namespace). And I was afraid to roll my own memory manager because I didn't understand what all those methods do. So MCJIT is future - will JITMemoryManager remain relevant? If so I

On Oct 4, 2008, at 2:51 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>> I like your approach of using the use lists but I'm not sure the >>> ordering >>> is guaranteed. If it is, your approach is superior. >> >> I got my patch updated to work with TOT. Here it is. Comments >> welcome. > > Hi Dave, > > Great. I'd like to get this in, but would

Hi, I would like to minimize the value of x1-x2, x2 is a fixed value of 0.01, x1 is the quantile of normal distribution (0.0032,x) with probability of 0.7, and the changing value should be x. Initial value for x is 0.0207. I am using the following codes, but it does not work. fr <- function(x) { x1<-qnorm(0.7,0.0032,x) x2=0.01 x1-x2 } xsd <- optim(0.0207, fr,