similar to: High volume problem: stat: no such file or directory

Thanks! That’s probably close enough for practical purposes. I looked at the overrides on various targets, and they all return true if the FMA hardware exists. - Arch From: Jingyue Wu [mailto:jingyue at google.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 2:56 PM To: Robison, Arch Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Best way for JIT to query whether llvm.fma.* is fast? Does

Dear R-users, I am trying to use the grep function to test whether a particular string is of the form "n.../mydir/myfile.mytype.myext". Anything between n and mytype could vary, and anything after mytype could vary. I tried to proceed by steps to build my regular expression... but I do not really understand why the last call of the following code do not work. Any help would be

Yes, the modeling of floating-point is trickier. The wrap-around trick used by ConstantRange seems less applicable, and there are the unordered NaNs. Though in all cases, the key abstraction is a lattice of values, so an instance of FPRange should be thought of as a point on a lattice, not an interval. The lattice needs to be complicated enough the cover the cases of interest, but not so

With floating point, won't you need to model a partial order for the end points? I thought there were pairs of floating point values which are incomparable. Not sure if partial order is the right abstraction, but I'm pretty sure a total order isn't. This may make implementing the range comparisons (which are themselves partially ordered) a bit tricky... Philip (Who knows just

> Checks against 1.0 are also common. Why not just add a FP range class, like our constant range, and go from there? That's certainly another way to go. My worry is that a more complicated lattice gets us deeper into rounding-mode issues and considerably more work for smaller gain. I like the idea of creating an FPRange class. We could start with a simple one and extend it as experience

Hi, all, I've been converting code from S-Plus ("S" for short) to R for a few weeks. Here are some differences I've found, aside from the big well-known ones (scoping, models, data storage) and the contents of Kurt Hornik's FAQ section 3.3.3. Let me start with the ones that seem like serious bugs or deficiencies: 1) LETTERS[c(NA,2)] in S is

I've developed a web application in PHP and R my script is <?php ... exec("R CMD BATCH --silent /home/marcello/R_in/myfile.bat /home/marcello/R_out/myfile.out"); ... ?> This script execute in R batch mode and write the myfile.out. On Win2000 the similar script is ok, but on linux I've a problem. I suppose is a permession problem because the same script on shell

More precisely, for a simd loop, if the safelen(VL) clause is specified, there should have no loop-carried lexical backward data dependency within the specified safe vector length VL. We will make this clear in the OpenMP 4.1 spec. Xinmin Tian (Intel) -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Hal Finkel Sent:

Thanks for the pointers. Looks like LazyValueInfo has the sort of infrastructure I had in mind. LVILatticeVal could be extended to floating point. (The comment "this can be made a lot more rich in the future" is an invitation :-). I'm thinking a simple lattice would address most cases of interest for floating-point checks. The lattice points for floating-point could be all

Also in assign() there some arguments lacking in R such as 'frame' and 'where', though I guess that 'frame' in S may be similar to 'pos' in R. Harvey -----Original Message----- From: David Brahm [SMTP:a215020@agate.fmr.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 11:36 AM To: r-help@stat.math.ethz.ch Cc: Kurt.Hornik@ci.tuwien.ac.at; r-bugs@r-project.org Subject:

Yes, I think the 2 outcomes are: - the current spec is unclear and will be clarified - in order to support safelen() and even the simd construct itself, LLVM will require infrastructure work to know when a lexically backwards dependence may have been introduced. Jon -----Original Message----- From: Tian, Xinmin [mailto:xinmin.tian at intel.com] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 10:43 AM To:

Oops, meant to send this to the mailing list instead of to Reid privately. (Why cc the mailing list instead of just sending to the mailing list?) In article <CACs=tyJ6zaHeiS0eNhBkdcZE--JY4k7yH9_P1yFbGqod6uymMw at mail.gmail.com>, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> writes: > Looks like a bug. This can probably be simplified with C++11. > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:39

For the Julia language JIT, we'd like be able to tell whether the llvm.fma.* intrinsic has hardware support. What's the best way to query LLVM (JIT) for this information? The information would be used in situations where the user wants to use different algorithms depending on whether FMA hardware is present or not. - Arch D. Robison -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

tools/llvm-objdump/COFFDump.cpp has two loops that advance the loop iterator using "I = ++I" instead of the usual "++I". For example: import_directory_iterator I = Obj->import_directory_begin(); import_directory_iterator E = Obj->import_directory_end(); if (I == E) return; outs() << "The Import Tables:\n"; for (; I != E; I = ++I) {

Hi all, Running LLVM 3.4 to create a custom pass for OpenCL transformations. I am attempting to GEP into a struct using IRBuilder's CreateStructGEP, but I keep getting this assert: aoc: ../../../../../../compiler/llvm/include/llvm/Instructions.h:703: llvm::Type* llvm::checkGEPType(llvm::Type*): Assertion `Ty && "Invalid GetElementPtrInst indices for type!"' failed.

It's a problem in the OpenMP specification. The authors (including some from Intel) intended that the OpenMP simd construct assert no lexically backward dependences exist, but as you say, it's not obvious from the spec. One of our OpenMP community members is going to bring up the ambiguity with the OpenMP committee. - Arch -----Original Message----- From: Humphreys, Jonathan

cB->getType()->getPointerElementType()->dump(); gives: %struct.RB = type opaque2189 x_idx = builder.CreateStructGEP(cB, 0); cB->dump() gives: %struct.RB addrspace(1)* %cB $1 = void //To undo confusion, the last cB is the function arg name. For this example I unfortunately chose the same name for my argument Value* as the argument name. //Also one correction. I am running

If I do M.dump(), at the top of the output I have: %struct.RB = type opaque Further down I have: @.str18 = internal addrspace(2) constant [13 x i8] c"RB_t*\00" However nowhere does it dump the full struct type when I call "M.dump()". I have it explicitly defined above the kernel in the kernel file, but LLVM doesn't seem to pick it up. Opaque is a placeholder until it

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Arnold Schwaighofer" <aschwaighofer at apple.com> > To: "Johannes Doerfert" <doerfert at cs.uni-saarland.de> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, "Arch Robison" <arch.robison at intel.com> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 11:29:16 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal for

I've developed a web application in PHP and R my script is <?php ... exec("R CMD BATCH --silent /home/marcello/R_in/myfile.bat /home/marcello/R_out/myfile.out"); ... ?> This script execute in R batch mode and write the myfile.out. On Win2000 the similar script is ok, but on linux I've a problem. I suppose is a permession problem because the same script on shell