search for: unfortunalely

...That is true. We ran into the same problem. However, you can turn off that functionality. And then join it to a Samba domain without a problem. I don't know what effect that would have on Exchange running on the Small Business server as we are only using it for a MSSQL/application server. Unfortunalely it was one of my windows admins that turned off that "feature" that requires it to be a PDC and he's since left the company and I don't know how to do it. But it definately can be done. I think it was had to be done through a commandline command and not through a gui of any kind...

...You can place those files from arhive to the folder, where app is and run from command shell: xptruss appname After program closing you'll find few of text files with the names of all DLLs, used by app. Useful if you want to know, which of them else you may need in Wine for the app to work. Unfortunalely I don't know how to turn off debugging function yet )), cause it consuming much of disk space with out.txt -file (main debugging file). Except if to start app for only short time. Sure, you must not to replace Wine libs with their native libraries such as: kernel32.dll, user32.dll, gdi32.dll a...

...+ a[i][j-1+v] + a[i][j+1+v]);<br />          }<br />          for (v = 0; v <  16-(N-2-j); v++) {  // This will be a single masked store operation<br />              a[i][j+v] = b[v];<br />          }<br />#endif<br />    }<br />}<br /><br />Unfortunalely compiler cannot do this for you: this is not equivalent transformation of original code. I am also not aware of any way to express this desired behavior less explicitly (e.g. OpenMP SIMD pragma won't work in this case).<br /><br />Minor note: You're using 'int' for data,...

...] + >> a[i][j-1+v] + a[i][j+1+v]); >> } >> for (v = 0; v < 16-(N-2-j); v++) { // This will be a single >> masked store operation >> a[i][j+v] = b[v]; >> } >> #endif >> } >> } >> >> Unfortunalely compiler cannot do this for you: this is not equivalent >> transformation of original code. I am also not aware of any way to express >> this desired behavior less explicitly (e.g. OpenMP SIMD pragma won't work in >> this case). >> >> Minor note: You're using &...

Does it happen due to loop carried dependence? if yes what is the solution to vectorize such codes? please reply. i m waiting. On Jul 1, 2017 12:30 PM, "hameeza ahmed" <hahmed2305 at gmail.com> wrote: > I even tried polly but still my llvm IR does not contain vector > instructions. i used the following command; > > clang -S -emit-llvm stencil.c -march=knl -O3