search for: stabilising

Has Timo backed off work, and been busy with something else, or has 1.0 really stabilised that much? Seems to me just a couple of weeks ago we were seeing a new test release every few days... now there's been nothing all month... I'm hoping it's ready for release... but if it's just that Timo's busy, well, I can understand that. We're about to receive some new

I have prepared a rough draft of my GSoC proposal, I'd request the mentors to look into it, and guide me upon the same. Google docs link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/158TI2EaUrqVsD__-mXdKUIlVM9_9cGlnc5w7NwX8ahs/edit?usp=sharing Regards. Aditya Kumar.

Hello, I'm Ayush from New Delhi, India. I am interested in Letor Stabilisation project for GSoC. I have a good background in machine learning. Sorry for getting in so late, university exams were holding me back. I'll try to cover as much as I can in the coming week. I am following the plan of attack suggested on the project page. Following are the things that I have completed: 1.

Hello everyone, I have completed introducing some code from v-hasu's branch into mine, mainly for Features, FeatureVector and FeatureManager classes. I have pushed the changes to https://github.com/ayshtmr/xapian/tree/letor-update. I am now proceeding to write unit tests for feature modules. There are a few things that I wanted to clarify: 1. I have introduced a lot of code in a single

Current uninitialized sensor detection does not work for me on nv4b and sensor returns crazy values (>190?C). It stabilises later, but it's too late - therm code shutdowns the machine... Let's just reset it on init. Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz at gmail.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/therm/nv40.c | 12 +++++++++++- 1 file changed, 11

Hello, I wanted to decide the dataset that should be used for Letor stabilisation project. I think 2009 INEX Wikipedia Collection <http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/departments/databases-and-information-systems/software/inex/> should work fine. It's a collection of 2,666,190 XML articles, 115 topics <http://inex.mmci.uni-saarland.de/protected/adhoc/2009-topics.zip>, 50,275 qrel

Hi All, I am interested in applying for the two projects listed in the Xapian Gsoc 2019 project idealist: "Learning to Rank Stabilisation" and "Weighting Schemes". I have downloaded the codebase and going through some of the commits related to Letor API, BM25, and DFR weighting schemes. Can anyone tell me how to write about the formal proposal for the above-mentioned projects?

On 3 February 2011 10:25, Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com> wrote: > I have submitted a bug some time ago to LLVM bugtracker: > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8931 Hi Siarhei, This is a really silly bug with a simple fix. We have a similar patch here locally, but as this is part of another set of patches we were waiting for it to stabilise. There are some

Hello, My name is Prakhar Pratyush. I am a 4th year Electronics & Communication engineering undergraduate student at Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Roorkee. My primary areas of Interest are machine learning, and Information Security and I am proficient in C++/Python/JavaScript programming languages as well. I was looking into the past gsoc organizations, and I came across Xapian. I

On 2009-02-08, at 05:59, Jonas Maebe wrote: > The proposal suggests to change/split the existing sub/add/mul > opcodes. This makes me wonder to what extent it is (currently, or > ever) advisable for an external compiler to generate LLVM IR. Is > there a plan to stabilise at some point and guarantee backwards > compatibility to a certain extent, or should compilers that are

Hi, I have submitted a bug some time ago to LLVM bugtracker: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8931 The problem is that I'm trying to use clang in linux system, running on ARM hardware. And this bug, as trivial as it is, seems to be a major showstopper. I wonder if I'm the only one trying to use LLVM/clang in this configuration or doing something in an unusual way? Anyway, the LLVM

On Thursday 03 February 2011 14:14:28 Renato Golin wrote: > On 3 February 2011 10:25, Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com> wrote: > > I have submitted a bug some time ago to LLVM bugtracker: > > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8931 > > Hi Siarhei, > > This is a really silly bug with a simple fix. > > We have a similar patch here

Dear, I'm having problems with the configuration of this gateway(GrandStream GXW 4108), I used the instructions from GrandStream but it doesn't work. Someone has a good configuration for this gateway? Thanks in advance, Nelson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 07 Feb 2009, at 23:17, Chris Lattner wrote: > Edwin was asking about how we should handle PR3328, how we should make > GEP respect -fwrapv etc. I wrote up some thoughts here if anyone is > interested: > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/IntegerOverflow.txt The proposal suggests to change/split the existing sub/add/mul opcodes. This makes me wonder to what extent it is

Hi All, I have an app making extensive use of Mutex and was concerned about the memory leak I have read about. I saw some sample code to reproduce the problem here: http://pastie.caboo.se/10194 So I thought I would run it myself to see the problem. I do not see a memory leak when using the sample code, but if I require "fastthread" before "thread" using fastthread (0.6.4.1)

...usb-1.0 enters beta To: fprint at reactivated.net Hi, libusb-1.0 has entered beta. http://www.reactivated.net/weblog/archives/2008/05/libusb-10-enters-beta/ libusb-1.0 is the lowest level component required by the asynchronous development work that I've been doing over the last few months. Stabilising and releasing libusb-1.0 is therefore an important prerequisite for stabilising/releasing all the recent fprint work, so this is quite a milestone. Daniel _______________________________________________ fprint mailing list fprint at reactivated.net http://lists.reactivated.net/mailman/listinfo/fpr...

> How are you compiling this? I get the following sort of output: > > llvm-gcc incdec.cpp -o incdec I am currently using LLVM 1.8 -- I was basically holding off porting until LLVM 2.0 stabilises because I want to be able to move to 64 bit Intel and don't want to have to hit a moving target. > void %inc(int* %p) { > entry: > %tmp = volatile load int* %p

Hi, On 23 Jun 2014, at 09:53, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote: > On 04/19/2014 03:15 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-03-06 at 14:05 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> Hi waldi, >>> >>> Are you planning to update the Xen package too 4.4 soon? Upstream have >>> released 4.4-rc6 and AIUI are planning to release the final version next

Hello everyone, My name is Ayush Tomar. I'll be working on Learning to Rank stabilisation project over the summers. Here are a few things that I plan to do in coming few days: 1. Revise the timeline. There are some portions that I had kept for the first and second week of coding which have already been done (except writing tests). So, I'd like to adjust the timeline according to it. 2.

On 08 Feb 2009, at 14:41, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2009-02-08, at 05:59, Jonas Maebe wrote: > >> The proposal suggests to change/split the existing sub/add/mul >> opcodes. This makes me wonder to what extent it is (currently, or >> ever) advisable for an external compiler to generate LLVM IR. Is >> there a plan to stabilise at some point and guarantee backwards