search for: unrepeatability

Hello All, I am (proudly?) announcing a new Ajax SlideShow project. It is part of a new bigger project starting up, still I am glad to announce you this early snapshot. Please consider taking a look at http://slideshow.webtwo.ws website The project itself - as long as the web page hosting it - it''s not as clean as it will be. I must also admit that, even if announced as release

Hi, I think I've been hit by the problem described here: http://oldlook.experts-exchange.com/Networking/Linux_Networking/Q_20762641.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;811169&Product=WinXP The server is Red Hat Linux 9, running samba samba-2.2.7a-7.9.0. We have client PCs running both Win98 and WinXP, but only the ones running WinXP display the problem.

I'm aware that there are IEEE requirements for floating point. But all C/C++ compilers like GCC or MSVC have unsafe/fast math switches that disable all problems related to NaN/Inf/+-0/precision etc because in some applications those are not as important as performance (for example graphics calculation). But as I understand, LLVM currently does not have such unsafe/fast math optimizations

I found out the other day that crossprod() will take a single matrix argument; crossprod(x) notionally returns crossprod(x,x). The two forms do not return identical matrices: x <- matrix(rnorm(3000000),ncol=3) M1 <- crossprod(x) M2 <- crossprod(x,x) R> max(abs(M1-M2)) [1] 1.932494e-08 But what really surprised me is that crossprod(x) is slower than crossprod(x,x): R>

Hi Bob, > For example expressions like "1+x+1+x+1+x+1+x" (basically adding a lot of > constants and variables) are complied to a long series off<add>s both in IR > and > assembly code. > Both GCC and MSVC generates C1*x +C2 (mov + mul + add). > > I am new to using LLVM. I am using Visual Studio 2008 on Windows, targeting > 32-bit X86 code. I'm using