search for: subsumes

Hi Rich, I noticed that libguestfs's cfg.mk had an old (and relatively inefficient) version of the rule that checks for empty lines at EOF. The one in maint.mk is much more efficient: >From cf93f04a980ec01ef37db9a0d4c7b99015169eee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering <meyering at redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:49:34 +0200 Subject: [PATCH libguestfs] maint: remove a

I am trying to removing a load to a TargetGlobalAddress in ISelDagToDag that my backend does not support. The TargetGlobalAddress is assumed to always be of ConstantInt or ConstantFP type, so this transformation is valid. I am correctly able to modify the dag and remove all of the uses of the node as specified in the attached before and after dot images. The nodes in question is the

On 2015-04-04, Bill Maltby (C4B) <centos4bill at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 11:12 +0100, Nux! wrote: >> 100% with Digimer here. <snip> > >> All this energy should be put into contributing towards to the >> project, testing, helping out community. > > Well, I used to agree. But when a bug report filed in December goes > untouched entering

>> 1. os << format_string("Test"); // writes "test" >> 2. os << format_string("{0}", 7); // writes "7" > > > The "<< format_string(..." is ... really verbose for me. It also makes me > strongly feel like this produces a string rather than a streamable entity. I wonder if we could use UDLs instead? os

On 02/06/2014 08:12 AM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > Please note that it makes a lot of sense to built compiler-rt (and sanitizers) with just-built > Clang. In fact, even though we should support building it with another compilers (gcc, MSVC), > using just-built-Clang should be a default scenario, like it is in configure+make build. This is possible with CMake using the ExternalProject

...'glm', 'lm', 'nls' and 'gls', 'lme' and others in package 'nlme'." Thus, I was expecting that logLik.nls() and logLik.nlme() could be used for objects of the nls and nlme class, respectively. Are these functions no longer needed because logLike() subsumes logLike.nls() and logLike.nlme() as special cases? Did/does logLike.nls() and logLike.nlme() have any advantages above and beyond logLike() when applying them to nls and nlme objects? On a related note, is there a way to get the log likelihoods of each individual from an nlsList object? On p. 3...

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > Here is a proposal that I mentioned sometime ago. Any thoughts,comments or > suggestions on this proposal would be appreciated. > The proposed solution to this problem to encode Function Notes in the IR. > define void @f() notes("opt-size,pic,noinline") { ... } > Here, the notes include a

>Polyhedral representations are powerful but somewhat expensive to >construct and simple dependence tests don't construct them. Forcing >all dependence test results to go through them would be overkill. >Also, many loop transforms, e.g., loop interchange, don't need the >polyhedral info, just direction vectors. You could instead provide >both direction

It seems the GVNPRE pass has been removed from the main trunk, though it is present in the 2.6 release. From the llvm-commits archive, I found that it was removed  with this checkin: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20090928/088214.html "remove the GVNPRE pass. It has been subsumed by the GVN pass." Does the GVN pass optimize all the partial redundancies

...l/superoptimizer.html and adapt them to run on LLVM code. It would seem that operating on LLVM code would save a lot of time because its semantics are much simpler than x86. The cost of operating on LLVM is that target-specific tricks would be missed. The outcome would be a new LLVM pass that subsumes at least the instruction combiner, and probably a few other passes as well. Benefits would include not missing cases missed by the current combiner and also more easily adapting to changes in the LLVM IR. All previous superoptimizers have worked on linear sequences of code. It would seem much...

> > Well, I used to agree. But when a bug report filed in December goes > untouched entering April, which I don't recall happening prior to RH > subsuming the project, it takes away impetus to ever file one again from > lowly end users like me I think. It appears that you are the only one to have encountered this bug. Within any project, open source or proprietary; problems

Which alias analysis algorithms in opt are worth comparing against (for terms of precision)? I know --anders-aa seems to give me pretty good results. Online [1] it seemed to mention steensgaard's algorithm and some kind of data structure analysis, but neither of these are currently accepted by opt. Is there some way to get them, or are they subsumed by the results of --anders-aa? Thanks,

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 20, 2008, at 8:57 AM, David Greene wrote: > >> On Tuesday 20 May 2008 07:03, Nicolas Capens wrote: >> >>> 1) Does ScalarReplAggregates totally superscede >>> PromoteMemoryToRegister? I >> >> Nope, they are different. Mem2Reg is really important if you

100% with Digimer here. I think there are no conspiracy theories. IMO RedHat does not want nor does it afford to mess up CentOS. All this energy should be put into contributing towards to the project, testing, helping out community. Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Digimer" <lists at

If you start a function in one file but don't close it, the package will still build if you manage to close it in a later file. Like so: a.R b.R c.R a.R: function_a <- function(){ print("this is function_a") } b.R: function_b <- function(){ print("unclosed function_b") # no closing } c.R: function_c <- function(){ print("function_c will be part of

...ate all the logic from compiler-rt's cmake/config-ix.cmake about which sanitizers are supported on which targets. Maybe compiler-rt could have a new check-all-compiler-rt target, which runs the checks for all supported sanitizers? Is it possible to implement this (it would be a lit target that subsumes a bunch of other lit targets)? Any other ideas? Thanks, Jay.

Hello, I do have two different plots from LAD and OLS regression objects like this: # LAD regression and related plot rq(formula = SBP ~ Age) f = coef(rq(SBP ~ Age)) pred = f[1] + f[2]*Age plot (Age, SBP) lines (Age, pred) # OLS regression and related plot Pred = lm(SBP ~ Age) plot (Age, SBP) lines (Age,fitted(Pred)) Well for comparatative reason I would would like to subsume both plots

On May 20, 2008, at 8:57 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Tuesday 20 May 2008 07:03, Nicolas Capens wrote: > >> 1) Does ScalarReplAggregates totally superscede >> PromoteMemoryToRegister? I > > Nope, they are different. Mem2Reg is really important if you want > register > allocation. Actually SROA does fully subsume Mem2Reg. It iterates between breaking up

Ahh, UDLs also wouldn't permit non literal format strings, which is a deal breaker imo On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 7:03 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote: > I'm not sure that would work well. The implementation relies on being able > to index into the parameter pack. How would you do that if each parameter > is streamed in? > > "{0} {1}"_fs(1, 2)

On Mar 30, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Devang Patel wrote: > > On Mar 30, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Christopher Lamb wrote: > >>> 1) Update LLVM LD/ST instructions to maintain alignment information >> >> Is this referring to the language itself, i.e. the bytecode/ >> assembly format and associated readers/writers? If so this is >> probably the portion that it's