search for: tractabl

Hi Petr, The following is different line of thought which is posted in different form, maybe you have some wise input on it. "I need to find Efficient(tracktable) deterministic algorithm for Matching Weighted Graphs with bounded degree. Now we all know Graph matching is non-tractable but when degree of vertex has upper bound are there any tractable algorithm? Does this special case comes under 'Finite Parameter Tractability' ? Also we know that Graph isomorphism where degree of vertex has upper bound has tractable algorithms. So will it be possible to reduce the Graph...

Deae R helpers, the problem I'm facing today is related to the manipulation of a string. The string is coming from a a porosimeter, whose control is under a complicate set-up of two computers One (running on DOS) is controlling directly the hardware, while the other (running on win XP) which process the data is connected to the first one via serial. I get the data from this last computer.

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:49:24AM -0700, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev wrote: > An optional MPFR dependency would also be pretty painful. I expect it will > frequently be missing and will not be exercised by most buildbots. IMO if constant folding of transcendental functions makes a significant difference for your program, you likely are doing something strange already. I don't think it

Hi all. I’ve heard a couple of times that some of the problems solved by various passes in the optimizer are indeed NP-hard, even though the instances are small enough to be tractable (and very quickly). Is this true? If so, which are these problems? Register allocation? Instruction scheduling? Are they solved exactly or by approximations? Or not solved at all (the need of solving them is avoided in some way)? Greetings, Nicola

...oking at this Tim. On a pandaboard, at least with the Release+Asserts config I tried, those tests do complain on stderr but llvm-lit thinks they've passed/expected fails, they don't actually count as fails like they do on the buildbot. Regarding solving PR16013 that looks like a relatively tractable job (on both 32-bit arm and aarch64) IF you're already familiar with the implications of what the instruction set does; unfortunately that set doesn't include me... Cheers, Dave ________________________________________ From: Tim Northover [t.p.northover at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 1...

Allow compile time creation of a hole at the high end of linear address space. This makes accomodating a hypervisor a much more tractable problem by giving it ample playground to live in. Currently, the hole size is fixed at config time; I have experimented with dynamically sized holes, and have a later patch that developes this potential, but it becomes much more useful once the exact negotiation of linear address space with the h...

...ively (note the gaps in the second one). As factors, the levels are named as above while of course the internal codes are (1,2,3) and (1,2,3,4) respectively. I want to make a design matrix of these as one would in a linear model except I can't use lm or glm since the error distribution is not tractable. So I generate an overall factor as 10*A+B (for example) then the internal codes and levels become 11,12,13,14,21,22,23,24,31,32,33,34. I don't mind the internal codes, but is there a neater way of generating the lm-type of factor levels a A*B to give the levels '11','14','...

...since I can search for numerical strings and they are nicely found. Of course, as is usual with such tables there are also headings and column lines, etc etc. that are less interesting than the numbers themselves. I've tried saving the pdf in various formats, some of which look vaguely tractable, but I'm hoping that there is something that is more automatic. Does anyone have experience that they could share toward this objective? url: www.econ.uiuc.edu/~roger Roger Koenker email rkoenker at uiuc.edu Department of Economics vox: 217-333-4558...

...questions which might not make perfect sense. Anyhow, here they are: 1) I would like very much to use R for processing some big data files (around 1.7 or more GB) for spatial analysis, wavelets, and power spectra estimation; is this possible with R? Within IDL, such a big data set seems to be tractable... 2) I have heard/read that R "puts all its data on ram"? Does this really mean my data file cannot be bigger than my ram memory? 3) If I have a big enough ram, would I be able to process whatever data set?? What constrains the practical limits of my data sets?? Thanks! -- ######...

Is there a good reason why known_hosts stores the address of the server but not the port? This is annoying when one host is running more than one instance of openssh with different ports and different keys, or (less tractably) when a NAT in front of multiple hosts multiplexes which host is connected to by port number. I see no immediate security implication in fixing this, but am I missing something? -- Alex Bligh

Allow compile time creation of a hole at the high end of linear address space. This makes accomodating a hypervisor a much more tractable problem by giving it ample playground to live in. Currently, the hole size is fixed at config time; I have experimented with dynamically sized holes, and have a later patch that developes this potential, but it becomes much more useful once the exact negotiation of linear address space with the h...

...me and object model. The two major problems I had really boil down to identifying GC points in machine code and statically identifying live roots at those GC points, both problems common to many collection techniques. Looking at the problem from that perspective makes the problem much more tractable, actually… >> [2] ocaml is licensed under the QPL [Trolltech/KDE], which has an >> onerous distribution clause which prohibits forks. My current work >> leaves the existing code generator in place, touching only a few >> files to integrate LLVM code generation as a r...

...; The two major problems I had really boil down to identifying GC > points in machine code and statically identifying live roots at > those GC points, both problems common to many collection > techniques. Looking at the problem from that perspective makes the > problem much more tractable, actually… Chris, This is much more generic than what I was originally thinking, but what do you think of providing a facility like this? enum GCPointKind { GCPSubroutineReturn, GCPFunctionExit, GCPSubroutineCall, GCPBackBranch }; class ??? { p...

...GOT magic to get > the right address to jump to and then use an absolute jump to that > register. You still have to arrange for the GOT to contain the right > value (looks like it's the address of the function relative to the > start of the GOT at first glance), but that's more tractable than > monkey-patching all the callsites. > > Cheers. > > Tim. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190209/02e99ccc/attachment.html>

Hi, Is it possible to tell LLVM somewhere that we prefer the asm printer to use x64 relative CALL (0xFF) instead of absolute one ? The goal is to be able to move the entire JIT program memory somewhere else and still be able to run the program. Thanks ! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...Similarly, cmake's > xcode generator is nominally open source > (http://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=blob;f=Source/cmGlobalXCodeGenerator.cxx;h=32eaef837e2d79c286ea7651d1ee3f69eb5f0f6a;hb=HEAD). > How come there's no interest in improving it? I don't generally believe it is tractable to generate great project files for a specific project from a generic configuration language. - Daniel > Not that I really want to defend cmake. I hate its language as much as anyone. > > Jeffrey >

> Both A9 bots are running the same Ubuntu (13.03), with the same GCC (4.7.2), > and are the same hardware (Panda ES RevB), so it really strikes me as odd > that we have such a different behaviour between them. Hmm. I'll see what I can do on my tablet (not tried building LLVM there before so it could take a while), it seems like there are *some* failures everywhere. If we're

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote: >  * I don't think CMake is good enough. I agree it solves problems, but > I want to use great tools, not ones that work. In particular: >    (c) This doesn't solve any other nice problems: >          (i) It doesn't make it easier to play with other build > systems (like Ninja, or gyp).

...win probabilities for each entrant. [(1, 0.049), (2, 0.129), (3, 0.043), (4, 0.013), (5, 0.015), (6, 0.040), (7, 0.066), (8, 0.038), (9, 0.204), (10, 0.022), (11, 0.234), (12, 0.044), (13, 0.068), (14, 0.035)] So, of course Sum(ps) = 1. In order to make some subsequent computations more tractable, I wish to cluster entrant win probabilities like so: [(1, 0.049), (2, 0.121), (3, 0.049), (4, 0.024), (5, 0.024), (6, 0.049), (7, 0.072), (8, 0.049), (9, 0.185), (10, 0.024), (11, 0.185), (12, 0.049), (13, 0.072), (14, 0.049)] viz. in this case I have 'bucketed' the entrant num...

...he right address to jump to and then use an absolute jump to that >>> register. You still have to arrange for the GOT to contain the right >>> value (looks like it's the address of the function relative to the >>> start of the GOT at first glance), but that's more tractable than >>> monkey-patching all the callsites. >>> >>> Cheers. >>> >>> Tim. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-...