similar to: An iterative function

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "An iterative function"

2004 Nov 18
1
Method dispatch S3/S4 through optimize()
I have been running into difficulties with dispatching on an S4 class defined in the SparseM package, when the method calls are inside a function passed as the f= argument to optimize() in functions in the spdep package. The S4 methods are typically defined as: setMethod("det","matrix.csr", function(x, ...) det(chol(x))^2) that is within setMethod() rather than by name before
2007 Jan 17
1
tapply, data.frame problem
Hi R-users, I'm quite new to R and trying to learn the basics. I have a following problem concerning the convertion of array object into data frame. I have made following data sets tmp1 <- rnorm(100) tmp2 <- gl(10,2,length=100) tmp3 <- as.data.frame(cbind(tmp1,tmp2)) tmp3.sum <- tapply(tmp3$tmp1,tmp3$tmp2,sum) tmp3.sum <- as.data.frame(tapply(tmp1,tmp2,sum)) and I want the
2008 Jul 18
2
[LLVMdev] Alignment of vectors
Consider the following C code: typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) __attribute__(( aligned(4) )) float float2_align2; void foo(void) { const float * p; size_t offset; float2 tmp = *((float2_align2 *)(p+offset)); } When compiled with clang ‹emit-llvm I get: define void @foo() { entry: %p = alloca float*, align 4
2013 Jan 29
3
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop awareness to the LoopVectorizer
On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > # ignore assumed dependences. > for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { > tmp1 = A[3i+1]; > tmp2 = A[3i+2]; > tmp3 = tmp1 + tmp2; > A[3i] = tmp3; > } > > Now I apply for whatever reason a partial reg2mem transformation. > > float tmp3[1]; > > # ignore assumed
2010 Jul 16
3
how to skip a specific value when using apply() function to a matrix?
Hello R experts, I'd like to studentize a matrix (tmp1) by column using apply() function and skip some specific values such as zeros in the example below to tmp2 but not tmp3. I used the script below and only can get a matrix tmp3. Could you please help me to studentize the matrix (tmp1) without changing the zeros and generate a new matrix tmp2? Thanks, Joshua tmp1 [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4]
2012 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] Question about LLVM NEON intrinsics
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to know if LLVM Neon intrinsics are designed to support only 'Legal' types for NEON units. > Using llc -march=arm -mcpu=cortex-a9 vmax4.ll -o vmax4.s on following ll code: > > > ; ModuleID = 'vmax.ll' > target datalayout =
2013 Jan 30
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop awareness to the LoopVectorizer
On 01/29/2013 07:58 PM, Nadav Rotem wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es > <mailto:tobias at grosser.es>> wrote: > >> >> # ignore assumed dependences. >> for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { >> tmp1 = A[3i+1]; >> tmp2 = A[3i+2]; >> tmp3 = tmp1 + tmp2; >> A[3i] = tmp3; >> } >>
2013 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] parallel loop awareness to the LoopVectorizer
On 01/28/2013 12:58 PM, Pekka Jääskeläinen wrote: > Hi, > > Attached is a patch which uses a simple "parallel_loop" metadata attached > to the loop branch instruction in the loop latch for skipping > cross-iteration > memory dependency checking in the LoopVectorizer. This was briefly > discussed > in the email thread "LoopVectorizer in OpenCL C work group
2008 Jul 18
0
[LLVMdev] Alignment of vectors
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Benedict Gaster <benedict.gaster at amd.com> wrote: > Consider the following C code: > > typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; > typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) __attribute__(( aligned(4) )) AFAIK, the aligned attribute doesn't do anything on a typedef of anything other than a struct/union type in either
2012 Sep 21
2
[LLVMdev] RE : Question about LLVM NEON intrinsics
Hi Eli, Thanks for the answer, it clarifies the situation for me. Do you know if there is Pass in LLVM that could be adapted to 'legalize' intrinsics calls ? Or shall I define my own intrinsics for non supported types ? Best Regards Seb ________________________________________ De : Eli Friedman [eli.friedman at gmail.com] Date d'envoi : vendredi 21 septembre 2012 11:54 À : Sebastien
2012 Sep 21
5
[LLVMdev] Question about LLVM NEON intrinsics
Hi all, I would like to know if LLVM Neon intrinsics are designed to support only 'Legal' types for NEON units. Using llc -march=arm -mcpu=cortex-a9 vmax4.ll -o vmax4.s on following ll code: ; ModuleID = 'vmax.ll' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64-f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-n32" target triple =
2008 Apr 01
2
Wrong UIDs returned from mailbox_transaction_commit_get_uids()
Hi, Wrong UIDs are returned from mailbox_transaction_commit_get_uids() in dovecot-1.1.rc3. The problem is in: int mailbox_transaction_commit(struct mailbox_transaction_context **t) { uint32_t tmp; return mailbox_transaction_commit_get_uids(t, &tmp, &tmp, &tmp); } It should be: int mailbox_transaction_commit(struct mailbox_transaction_context **t) { uint32_t tmp1,
2012 Feb 01
3
[LLVMdev] Issues with the llvm.stackrestore intrinsic
Hi, I have two problems regarding the llvm.stackrestore intrinsic. I'm running on 3.0, but a quick test on trunk also showed the same behavior. First problem: --------------- I have code like: tmp1 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp2 = alloca [do some stuff with tmp2] call llvm.stackrestore(tmp1) [some other stuff] tmp3 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp4 = alloca [do some stuff
2009 Mar 19
3
[LLVMdev] Proposal to disable some of DAG combine optimizations
Some of the optimizations that the first DAG combine performs is counter productive for our 8-bit target. For example in: // I dropped the types because they are irrelevant. // Excuse me for changing the syntax... store %tmp1, %var %tmp2 = load %var %tmp4 = add %tmp3, %tmp2 Since load is the only user of var and since var has just be stored to, it assumes that %tmp1 is alive and it goes ahead
2010 Sep 10
1
[LLVMdev] Missing Optimization Opportunities
Hi, I'm using LLVM 2.7 right now, and I found "opt -std-compile-opts" has missed some opportunities for optimization: define void @spa.main() readonly { entry: %tmp = load i32* @dst-ip ; <i32> [#uses=3] %tmp1 = and i32 %tmp, -16777216 ; <i32> [#uses=1] %tmp2 = icmp eq i32 %tmp1, 167772160 ; <i1> [#uses=2]
2012 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] Question about LLVM NEON intrinsics
On Sep 21, 2012, at 2:58 AM, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com> wrote: > Hi Eli, > > Thanks for the answer, it clarifies the situation for me. Do you know if there is Pass in LLVM that could be adapted to 'legalize' intrinsics calls ? > Or shall I define my own intrinsics for non supported types ? You should never generate these sorts of intrinsics with
2008 Jul 18
1
[LLVMdev] Alignment of vectors
Hi, Comments inline. Ben On 18/07/2008 16:30, "Eli Friedman" <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Benedict Gaster > <benedict.gaster at amd.com> wrote: >> Consider the following C code: >> >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) ))
2008 Jun 28
1
mapping one redundant index to another redundant index
Dear R users, I have a simple problem I cannot solve, but I sure you can help. I have two vector, let say > tmp1 <- c("a", "a", "b", "c") > tmp2 <- c("a", "a", "b", "c", "c", "d") and I want to create a matrix of two column for which I have all the combinations of the same character,
2007 Jun 25
2
[LLVMdev] Question about Alias Analysis
Hi! I'm currently working on developing a new technique for alias analysis and wish to know how to compare it's results to the results that LLVM gets. The algorithm I have operates on LLVM assembly (I wrote the analysis in Haskell, so unfortunately I can't embed it into LLVM very easily). I tried using the option to print alias sets, but I'm not quite sure how to interpret the
2009 Mar 20
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal to disable some of DAG combine optimizations
Disabling this optimization in the DAG combiner isn't going to eliminate the problem; instcombine, GVN, and maybe even others also happen to perform this optimization. You may find it more effective to look for ways for codegen to recover in these kinds of situations. Dan On Mar 19, 2009, at 10:38 AM, Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com wrote: > Some of the optimizations that the first