search for: steamroller

...[table(n0)>N]))) Some of the factor levels may be empty for one of the factors but the same level must be present in the other. Is there a simple way to extract nn0 and nn1 so that the pairs remain correctly aligned and each list has at least N cases of each name? Or do I have to jump into my steamroller and do a couple of loops? TIA John -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the s...

> Again, this is a decision the LLVM community needs to make based on its own cost/benefit analysis. We often don't start new projects with mature code -- in fact, doing that is an unusual case. I can't speak for every new project, but the ones I've followed closely (OMP hell) I can say that not a single piece of code was accepted without a fight and that it was meant to be

Hi Jason, The long discussion made me wondering where this was going, but re-reading you original email [0], there was an acknowledgment of a potential future merge between the projects, and I can of make sense of the current picture. So you can forget about my question below! [0]: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-March/096576.html

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > You get the code you want with > > > > @foo = external hidden global i8 > > > > or > > > > @foo = external protected global i8 > > Sorry, not quiet. What you get is > > leaq foo(%rip), %rax > > Since it is still assuming foo is a

> You get the code you want with > > @foo = external hidden global i8 > > or > > @foo = external protected global i8 Sorry, not quiet. What you get is leaq foo(%rip), %rax Since it is still assuming foo is a position in the file. So yes, we need a way to declare an absolute value. If we can declare it, we may as well use the same construct to define it. I guess the

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > Docker will eat away at this problem going forward. You naturally will not already have Dockerized versions of apps built 10 years ago, and it may not be practical to create them now, but you can start insisting on getting them today so that your future OS changes don?t break things for you again. > Yes,

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > Responding to both of your emails in one, sorry for the delay: > > On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > I think there are a couple of additional considerations we should make > here: > > - What are we trying to model? To me it's clear

On Jan 6, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > So, after you've spent at least 10 years rolling out machines to do > things as fast as you can, and teaching the others in your > organization to spell 'chkconfig' and use 'system ...' commands,

Responding to both of your emails in one, sorry for the delay: > On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > I think there are a couple of additional considerations we should make here: > What are we trying to model? To me it's clear that GlobalConstant is for modelling integers, not pointers. That alone may not necessarily be enough to

...then can start posting patches > based on the charter and other stuff you've already worked up. > > (Also happy for folks who've been keeping silent to chime in with more > opinions! Just assuming that most don't have strong feelings either way at > this point.) yay for steamroller approach without actually addressing any of my valid concerns. I'd expect nothing less from you Chandler, nice job.. It's not like they will be contributing code to this area and or have contributed much to the areas of offloading. (Sorry Hal, but I may be mistaken in your case.. I'd n...

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > >>> There are more JavaScript interpreters in the world than Dalvik, ART,[2] and Java ? VMs combined. Perhaps we should rewrite everything in JavaScript instead? >> >> I'm counting the running/useful instances of actual program code, > > I rather doubt you?ve done anything like