similar to: Solving an integral in R gives the error “The integral is probably divergent”

Is there a way that is currently implemented to promote memory stores in two data paths to the same location to use registers and move the store to convergence point? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120330/56ec3359/attachment.html>

Hi, I was trying to make a density plot with 13 samples. To distinguish each sample, it would be good if each color is as different as possible from the other colors. I could use the built in function, but that does not do more than 8 colors and then goes back to recycling the cols. If I use a palette, then it is really difficult to distinguish between the colors. So, is there a way that I can

On 11 February 2016 at 17:08, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:53 AM, Dan Liew via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> > Can you somehow verify that this heap-use-after-free is happening? >> > E.g. print all the pointer values coming from memory::allocate, coming >> > into >> >

Hi Kostya & Yury, Thanks for the advice. On 9 February 2016 at 22:48, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> # TL;DR >> >> I've been building an application with and without the address >> sanitizer (with gcc 5.3 and

Hi, # TL;DR I've been building an application with and without the address sanitizer (with gcc 5.3 and clang 3.7.1) and I've observed that the application's behaviour changes (assertion hit/ not hit). I'm wondering if this could be a bug in address sanitizer or if the application I'm running is just buggy (e.g. doing bad things like relying on memory layout, etc.). I'm

Dear All, I would like to generate m positive real numbers c_i, I=1,...,m, such that (1) c_1 + c_2 + ... + c_m=m, (1) after being ordered into c_1 >= c_2 >= .... >=c_m>0, we have that c_m is of the same order of m^(-1/8), when m is sufficiently large. Thanks, -Chee [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hello Everyone, I can see that a few people are interested in SIP WIFI phones. I have tested several Linksys 300,and it is OK. More of a toy then a business tool. It a poor built in ear speaker, which makes all calls sound tinny, and the unit is known to hang. I have two Linksys 300's that are fun to play with however, I wont hand them out to users. HOWEVER- The Zultys WIP 2 is an

The survival package, like many others, has several helper functions that are not declared in the namespace, since their only use is to be called by other "main" functions of the package.? This works well since the functions in the survival namespace can see them --- without ::: arguments --- and others don't. Until a situation I ran into this week, for which I solicit comments

On 16/10/2018 6:42 PM, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel wrote: > The survival package, like many others, has several helper functions that are not declared > in the namespace, since their only use is to be called by other "main" functions of the > package.? This works well since the functions in the survival namespace can see them --- > without ::: arguments --- and

Hi all, I have a C function, say Cfun, that calls Lapack's DGEMM routine and I need to create a shared library to use Cfun inside R. The C file is the following #include<stdio.h> #include<R.h> #include<R_ext/Lapack.h> void Cfun(double *res, double *X, int *n, int *q) { char *ptr_TRANSA, TRANSA='T', *ptr_TRANSB, TRANSB='N'; ptr_TRANSA=&TRANSA;

Hi, I'm Ryo Ota. I'm using LLVM 3.8.1. I have a quesion about inlining function in C++ API. I'd like to inline some functions in a module in the same way as `opt -inline` command. But my C++ code didn't work what I want to do. For example, by using `opt -inline` command,`main.ll` is converted into the `inlined.ll`(`opt` command worked what I want to do) [main.ll (Not inlined)]

> 2. change cfun[[1]] <- quote(cord.work) to cfun[[1]] <- > quote(survival:::cord.work). You say this will mess up your test bed. > That suggests that your test bed is broken. This is a perfectly legal > and valid solution. Valid in a package, but forces code to call a loaded library version of a function rather than (say) a 'source'd user-space version that is under

Mark, that's actually a fair statement, although your extra operator doesn't cause construction at parse time. You still call paste0(), but just add an extra layer on top of it. I also doubt that even in gigantic loops the benefit is going to be significant. Take following example: atestfun <- function(x){ y <- paste0("a very long", "string for

Hi All, I have some questions regarding the R C API. Let's assume I have a function which is defined as follows: R file: myfunc <- function(a, b, ...) .External(Cfun, a, b, ...) C file: SEXP Cfun(SEXP args) { args = CDR(args); SEXP a = CAR(args); args = CDR(args); SEXP b = CAR(args); args = CDR(args); /* continue to do something with remaining arguments in "..."

This is a seemingly simple problem - hopefully someone can help. Problem: we have two integers. We want (1) all the common factors, and (2) all the possible products of these factors. We know how to get (1), but can't figure out a general way to get (2). Example: 40 and 80 have these factors: c(1,2,2,2,5) and c(1,2,2,2,2,5). We can use match() to get the common factors c(1,2,2,2,5). What

Hello, It seems to me that our current DivergenceAnalysis does not save which BasicBlocks may suffer from divergent control. Am I correct? I want to modify our DivergenceAnalysis to add a "bool isControlDivergent(BasicBlock*) const" method and save in the divergence propagator the basicblock that are divergent. I am not sure that is entirely correct, if you have input on that please

Thank you for your reply Jiefei. I think in theory your solution should work. I'll have to give them a try. On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 23:41 Wang Jiefei, <szwjf08 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Morgan, > > My solutions might not be the best one(I believe it's not), but it should > work for your question. > > 1. Have you considered Rf_duplicate function? If you want to change

Hi All I am getting the above mentioned error when I run the code below. I don't know why because I have implemented the function and I'm calling the function with a parameter. I'm obviously missing the plot ... Can someone perhaps point out the error of my ways? Error: > out<-ode(y=init, times=times, func=G1999, parms=parms, method="lsoda") Error in m_Na(v) : attempt

TL;DR This RFC is a joint effort by Intel and Saarland University to bring the divergence analysis of the Region Vectorizer [1,2,3,4,5] (dubbed the vectorization analysis of RV) to LLVM. The implementation is available on github for feedback [0]. The existing divergence analysis infrastructure in LLVM has conceptual limitations (structured control, SCEV based). The new analysis resolves bugs

Hello, Yes? Where is allActive defined, I couldn't find it. Basically, a BB is control divergent if it's execution depends on a branch that itself depends on a divergent ssa value. On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Zaks, Ayal <ayal.zaks at intel.com> wrote: > What would be the definition of “isControlDivergent(BasicBlock*)”; the > complementary of “allActive(BasicBlock*)” –