search for: upperbound

...╴╴╴╴╴╴╴╴┡━━━━━━━┩╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶╶ │ │ │ │ Cmp1: Offset ≥ 0 (unless constant) │ │ Cmp2: Size ≥ Offset ┆ ┆ Cmp3: ObjSize ≥ NeededSize I am looking at generating IR like this: %upperbound = getelementptr inbounds i64* %memobj, i64 %elements %end = getelementptr inbounds i64* %ptr, i64 1 %ilowerbound = ptrtoint i64* %memobj to i64 %iupperbound = ptrtoint i64* %upperbound to i64 %iptr = ptrtoint i64* %ptr to i64 %iend = ptrtoint i64* %end to i64 %cmpl = icmp ult %iptr, %...

...buffer) - ptr points to the last few bytes of the address space (with a large offset, but starting in bounds) - the information read/written is large and therefore there's an overflow in the memory addresses that are accessed. In this case, you'll have ptr > lowerbound and end < upperbound. The bad part is that end < ptr. I thought a bit on the subject and I couldn't find any solution with just 2 branches. The exception I found is if the size of an allocated object is always smaller than half of the address space (which seems a reasonable assumption to me, but I didn'...

...- as.vector(tail(head(mo,i),1)) wgt.vect <- as.vector(tail(head(moWeightsMax,i),1)) cov.mat <- cov(tail(head(morets,i+12),12)) opt.fun <- function(wgt.vect) -sum(Mo.vect %*% wgt.vect) / (t(wgt.vect) %*% (cov.mat %*% wgt.vect)) LowerBounds<-c(0.2,0.05,0.1,0,0,0) UpperBounds<-c(0.6,0.3,0.6,0.15,0.1,0.2) OptimSolution<-optim(wgt.vect, fn=opt.fun, method="L-BFGS-B",lower=LowerBounds,upper=UpperBounds) Any thoughts are appreciated! Mike Michael Ashton, CFA Managing Principal Enduring Investments LLC W: 973.457.4602 C: 551.655.8006 [[alternat...

...Consider two loops with one interation - First with constant lower bound, second with usual non-constant lower bound: int main(int argc, char ** argv) { int numOfIterations= 1; int stride=1; int lowerBound = 1000; - 1st | int lowerBound = argc; - 2nd int upperBound = lowerBound + (numOfIterations - 1)*stride; int i = lowerBound; int s = 0; while(i <= upperBound) { s += i; i++; } return s; } After the application of -O3 optimization: The first loop was unrolled: defin...

...nt lower bound, second with usual non-constant lower bound: >> >>     int main(int argc, char ** argv) >>     { >>         int numOfIterations= 1; >>         int stride=1; >>         int lowerBound = 1000; - 1st | int lowerBound = argc; - 2nd >>         int upperBound = lowerBound + (numOfIterations - 1)*stride; >> >>         int i = lowerBound; >> >>         int s = 0; >>         while(i <= upperBound) >>         { >>            s += i; >>            i++; >>         } >>         return s; >>  ...

...s to the last few bytes of the address space (with a large > offset, but starting in bounds) > - the information read/written is large and therefore there's an > overflow in the memory addresses that are accessed. > > In this case, you'll have ptr > lowerbound and end < upperbound. The bad > part is that end < ptr. > > > I thought a bit on the subject and I couldn't find any solution with > just 2 branches. > The exception I found is if the size of an allocated object is always > smaller than half of the address space (which seems a reasonable &gt...

...sual non-constant lower bound: >>> >>> int main(int argc, char ** argv) >>> { >>> int numOfIterations= 1; >>> int stride=1; >>> int lowerBound = 1000; - 1st | int lowerBound = argc; - 2nd >>> int upperBound = lowerBound + (numOfIterations - 1)*stride; >>> >>> int i = lowerBound; >>> >>> int s = 0; >>> while(i <= upperBound) >>> { >>> s += i; >>> i++; >>> }...

...First with constant lower bound, second with usual non-constant lower bound: > > int main(int argc, char ** argv) > { > int numOfIterations= 1; > int stride=1; > int lowerBound = 1000; - 1st | int lowerBound = argc; - 2nd > int upperBound = lowerBound + (numOfIterations - 1)*stride; > > int i = lowerBound; > > int s = 0; > while(i <= upperBound) > { > s += i; > i++; > } > return s; > } > After the application of -O3...

...)) > wgt.vect <- as.vector(tail(head(moWeightsMax,i),1)) > cov.mat <- cov(tail(head(morets,i+12),12)) > opt.fun <- function(wgt.vect) -sum(Mo.vect %*% wgt.vect) / (t(wgt.vect) %*% (cov.mat %*% wgt.vect)) > > LowerBounds<-c(0.2,0.05,0.1,0,0,0) > UpperBounds<-c(0.6,0.3,0.6,0.15,0.1,0.2) > > OptimSolution<-optim(wgt.vect, fn=opt.fun, method="L-BFGS-B",lower=LowerBounds,upper=UpperBounds) > > > Any thoughts are appreciated! > > Mike > > Michael Ashton, CFA > Managing Principal > > Enduring Investm...

...vect <- as.vector(tail(head(moWeightsMax,i),1)) >> cov.mat <- cov(tail(head(morets,i+12),12)) >> opt.fun <- function(wgt.vect) -sum(Mo.vect %*% wgt.vect) / (t(wgt.vect) %*% (cov.mat %*% wgt.vect)) >> >> LowerBounds<-c(0.2,0.05,0.1,0,0,0) >> UpperBounds<-c(0.6,0.3,0.6,0.15,0.1,0.2) >> >> OptimSolution<-optim(wgt.vect, fn=opt.fun, method="L-BFGS-B",lower=LowerBounds,upper=UpperBounds) >> >> >> Any thoughts are appreciated! >> >> Mike >> >> Michael Ashton, CFA >> M...

...verwriting it with the idmap.ldb from> the first.> > Let me have a look at the classicupgrade code and get back to you, it shouldn't create xidNumbers like that. Speaking of which, can you check> in idmap.ldb for the DN 'dn: CN=CONFIG'. What are 'lowerBound' and 'upperBound' set to ? You're right, I remember dumping of that file and copying to second DC. Interesting is, that on Samba 4.2 there was no problem about sysvolcheck/reset: UIDs/GIDs were absolutely same, I didn't do any changes on them.ldbsearch -H /var/lib/samba/private/idmap.ldb | grep "dn...

...r(tail(head(moWeightsMax,i),1)) >>> cov.mat <- cov(tail(head(morets,i+12),12)) >>> opt.fun <- function(wgt.vect) -sum(Mo.vect %*% wgt.vect) / (t(wgt.vect) %*% (cov.mat %*% wgt.vect)) >>> >>> LowerBounds<-c(0.2,0.05,0.1,0,0,0) >>> UpperBounds<-c(0.6,0.3,0.6,0.15,0.1,0.2) >>> >>> OptimSolution<-optim(wgt.vect, fn=opt.fun, method="L-BFGS-B",lower=LowerBounds,upper=UpperBounds) >>> >>> >>> Any thoughts are appreciated! >>> >>> Mike >>> >>>...

...) > >>> cov.mat <- cov(tail(head(morets,i+12),12)) > >>> opt.fun <- function(wgt.vect) -sum(Mo.vect %*% wgt.vect) / > (t(wgt.vect) %*% (cov.mat %*% wgt.vect)) > >>> > >>> LowerBounds<-c(0.2,0.05,0.1,0,0,0) > >>> UpperBounds<-c(0.6,0.3,0.6,0.15,0.1,0.2) > >>> > >>> OptimSolution<-optim(wgt.vect, fn=opt.fun, method="L-BFGS-B",lower= > LowerBounds,upper=UpperBounds) > >>> > >>> > >>> Any thoughts are appreciated! > >>> > &g...

...ndices from 1 to 10 for the rows and 2 to 11 for the columns. TYPE(t) :: array(10,2:11) For this declaration, the compiler generates the following LLVM metadata. !100 = !DIFortranArrayType(baseType: !7, elements: !101) !101 = !{ !102, !103 } !102 = !DIFortranSubrange(constLowerBound: 1, constUpperBound: 10) !103 = !DIFortranSubrange(constLowerBound: 2, constUpperBound: 11) The DWARF generated for this is as follows. (DWARF asserts in the standard that arrays are interpreted as column-major.) DW_TAG_array_type: DW_AT_name: array DW_AT_type: 4d08 ;TYPE(t) DW_...

...ere are three parameters that I sometimes change and each can cause this error all of a sudden (but most of the time it doesn't so there doesn't seem to be any consistency!) - absError (a parameter from the adaptIntegrate function) I write this as absError = 1e-x for some natural number x - upperBound / lowerBound (a parameter from the adaptIntegrate function) I write these as upperBound = c(a,b) for some real numbers a,b. - a parameter that I pass to my function that is being integrated and is just a real number Once I defined a variable A<-10 and then passed A to the function and got an er...

Hi, You can use the projectLinear argument in BB::spg to optimize with linear equality/inequality constraints. Here is how you implement the constraint that all parameters sum to 1. require(BB) spg(par=p0, fn=myFn, project="projectLinear", projectArgs=list(A=matrix(1, 1, length(p0)), b=1, meq=1)) Hope this is helpful, Ravi [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...missing data blank, each cell with missing data contains a dot (.) The data are binary in almost all columns, with only a few columns containing whole numbers, which I believe requires 2 bytes for the binary and 4 for the others. So, by my calculations (assuming 4 bytes for all cells to create an upperbound) I should need around 92890 * 1620 * 4 = 574MB to read in these data and about twice that for analyses. My computer has 3GB. But, I am unable to read in the file even though I have allocated sufficient memory to R for this. My first question is do the dots in the empty cells consume additional...

...############################################# nci <-function () { npb.n.L <- r.value - 1.96*sqrt(npb.var) npb.n.U <- r.value + 1.96*sqrt(npb.var) npb.n <- array(data = c( npb.n.L, npb.n.U), dim = c(1,2), dimnames = list("Estimates" ,c("LowerBound","UpperBound"))) npb.n.CI <- list( Type = "Normal Confidence Interval", ConfidenceInterval= npb.n) npb.n.CI } I use the source() function to include these "secondary/sub" functions, just before they are called the main function. I get an Error message when any of the...

...verwriting it with the idmap.ldb from> the first.> > Let me have a look at the classicupgrade code and get back to you, it shouldn't create xidNumbers like that. Speaking of which, can you check> in idmap.ldb for the DN 'dn: CN=CONFIG'. What are 'lowerBound' and 'upperBound' set to ? You're right, I remember dumping of that file and copying to second DC. Interesting is, that on Samba 4.2 there was no problem about sysvolcheck/reset: UIDs/GIDs were absolutely same, I didn't do any changes on them.ldbsearch -H /var/lib/samba/private/idmap.ldb | grep "dn...

...ng LLVM metadata. !100 = !DIFortranArrayType(baseType: !7, elements: !101) Since the DI* hierarchy really just is the DWARF type hierarchy, I don't think we will need to introduce any fortran-specific names for arrays. !101 = !{ !102, !103 } !102 = !DIFortranSubrange(constLowerBound: 1, constUpperBound: 10) !103 = !DIFortranSubrange(constLowerBound: 2, constUpperBound: 11) The DWARF generated for this is as follows. (DWARF asserts in the standard that arrays are interpreted as column-major.) DW_TAG_array_type: DW_AT_name: array DW_AT_type: 4d08 ;TYPE(t) DW_TAG_sub...