similar to: Adjusted means and generalized chain block designs

Hello everyone, A little background first: I have collected psychophysical data from 12 participants, and each participant's data is represented as a scatter plot (Percieved roughness versus Physical roughness). I would like to know whether, on average, this data is best fit by a linear function or by a quadratic function. (we have a priori reasons to expect a quadratic) Some of my

Hi All ! Recently in the mailing list there was the question about benchmarking LLVM. I was told that LLVM get's benchmarked in the nightly test. While this is true, I wanted to have a tool to compare LLVM against other compilers, so I wrote a little python program (attached) that filled my need. It is completely outside of the LLVM makefile framework, but this stems from the fact that I

Hi all, We have 4 outstanding tests on clang-mergefunc-x86_64-freeBSD9.2 builder. I have introduced issues for them in bugzilla: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18089 http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18056 Since we have opened issues for these tests, can we add them to ignore-list for this builder? It allows faster catch and fix other failures (if we get them). I also wandering, may be

Is there code available to decompose interactions involving at least one nominal factor with more than 2 levels as described, e.g., by Tukey or by Mandel (1971, Technometrics, 13: 1-18)? Tukey's model: E(y[i,j]) = mu0 + a[i] + b[j] + c*a[i]*b[j], estimating a, b, and c so sum(a) = sum(b)= 0. Mandel essentially describes a singular value decomposition of the interaction. Thanks,

> Chandler’s complex arithmetic changes are also in the range: r219557 in clang. We saw it change the code in mandel-2 significantly. mandel-2 is broken on hard FP ABI systems, btw. The reason is simply: we're emitting a call to __muldc3 with AAPCS VFP calling convention, however, the function expects softfp (AAPCS) calling conv and reads garbage from GP registers. I'm working on fix.

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:51:38PM +0400, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > > > Chandler’s complex arithmetic changes are also in the range: r219557 > in clang. We saw it change the code in mandel-2 significantly. > > mandel-2 is broken on hard FP ABI systems, btw. The reason is

Dear R users, I have some trouble using the allEffects() function to compute and display effect plots for a linear model. My data is quite simple, it concerns effects of 3 treatments on the tumoral volume of mice. vTum codes for the qualitative initial volume, from small to big, temps is the time in month since beginning of treatment, and S?rie codes for the batch. Data is unbalanced. >

Hey everyone, Not sure if anyone had tried this but I managed to get LLVM and clang to build on Nexenta Alpha 7. This is an OpenSolaris/GNU OS. There wasn't much to change for LLVM, except "#undef"ing a lot of x86 register name equivalents and the like (ie. EAX,ESP,CS,FS...). There were a couple of similar undef's needed for clang, as well. The clang testsuite ran fine except

Hi Chandler, That's embarrassing how weird this part of clang is. I have a provisional patch which fixes the problem but underlines clang's problems. I will submit it tonight for comments. суббота, 18 октября 2014 г. пользователь Chandler Carruth написал: > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Anton Korobeynikov < > anton at korobeynikov.info >

Folks, First win of the benchmark buildbot! http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/graph?plot.0=49.128.2&highlight_run=31861 It seems mandel-2 had a huge regression a few commits ago, and based on a quick look, it may have to do with the inst combine changes. I haven't investigated yet, but this is the first time I spot regressions on test-suite, so I'd like to first congratulate

Hi all, I'm having some trouble in understanding how to ste the Error() term in the aov() function when fitting a hierarchical ANOVA. I have data concerning the expression of 2 miRNAs in 3 different cell lines, with 2 different extraction methods. The data is organized as follows : Line Extraction Target Expression 1 BC54 miRNA RNU48 22.48 2 BC54 miRNA

Hello; I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the ./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the --enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with llvmgcc source/binaries and I

Hello, I was interested in how much Type-Based Alias Analysis helps to optimize code. For that purpose, I've compared three sets of benchmarks: compiled without TBAA, compiled with a default TBAA metadata format, and compiled with new TBAA metadata format. As a set of benchmarks, I've used the LLVM test suite (http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#test-suite-overview) which has a lot of

On Oct 20, 2009, at 6:02 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Tanya, > >> 1) Compile llvm from source and untar the llvm-test in the projects >> directory (name it llvm-test or test-suite). Choose to use a pre- >> compiled llvm-gcc or re-compile it yourself. > > I compiled llvm and llvm-gcc with separate objects directories. > Platform is x86_64-linux-gnu. > Ok.

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Carter, Jack <jcarter at mips.com> wrote: > Has anyone converted llvm/projects/test-suite to use the llvm assembler > instead of gcc? > > If so, what was needed to change and how? > > My assumption is that this would be a good way to test the llvm assembler. > Not quite sure what you mean, as far as I know there isn't any assembler

Has anyone converted llvm/projects/test-suite to use the llvm assembler instead of gcc? If so, what was needed to change and how? My assumption is that this would be a good way to test the llvm assembler. Jack -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121015/a91a495f/attachment.html>

Perhaps you noticed that LLVM gained a new optimizing register allocator yesterday (r130568). Linear scan is going away, and RAGreedy is the new default for optimizing builds. Hopefully, you noticed because your binaries were suddenly 2% smaller and 10% faster*. Some noticed because LLVM started crashing or miscompiling their code. Greedy replaces a fairly big chunk of the code generator, so

On 16 October 2014 09:34, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Interesting. Looks like the problem is in (219545, 219569]. Yes. > and given the magnitude of the change, I think that the trip-count changes are more likely. Good point. > Of course, all of these things are bug fixes :( -- So how do we follow-up on this? Correctness before performance. Always. I'll create

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

Hi, LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results: Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4) Release mode, but with assertions enabled LLVM srcdir == objdir # of expected passes 2250 # of expected failures 5 I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC, so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff" test the machine was swapping