similar to: [LLVMdev] looking for a burg-style code generator generator

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Roman Levenstein wrote: >>> Wouldn't it be possible and even more clean to have just one >>> description like (I use a pseudo-description here): >>> >>> def MOVrr : I<0x88, MRMDestReg, (ops (GR8|GR16|GR32) :$dst, >>> (i8mem|i16mem|i32mem):$src), >>> "mov{b} {$src, $dst|$dst, $src}", []>,

Hi Chris, Thanks a lot for your answer! Chris Lattner wrote: >> 1. Why does X86 instruction set description provide different >> descriptions for the same instructions, which differ only in the size >> of operands? >> E.g. >> >> def MOV8rm : I<0x8A, MRMSrcMem, (ops GR8 :$dst, i8mem :$src), >> "mov{b} {$src, $dst|$dst, $src}",

Hi! I am new to looping and R in general; and I have sent waaaay to much time on this one problem and am about a hair away from doing it manually for the next two days. So, there is a package that while calculating the statistic creates lists (that look like matrices) in the background. Each item (there are 10 items) has one of these ‘matrix looking list’ that I need to extract data from. The

The BGL (Boost Graph Library) defines tie(), which is exactly what the tie() defined in STLExtras.h. The header files of GBL use boost::tie(), and other boost libraries use boost::tie() too. How to resolve the ambiguity for compiler? -- Tzu-Chien Chiu, 3D Graphics Hardware Architect <URL:http://www.csie.nctu.edu.tw/~jwchiu>

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Roman Levenstein wrote: > I'm trying to implement a new backend for an embedded CISC processor. > Therefore I thought that it makes sense to take X86 target as a basis, > to save some time. Ok. Note that the X86 backend is one of the most complex though, because it supports several subtargets and ABIs, which makes it more complex than some other targets. >

Hi, I was wondering if anyone could give me advice regarding using the lmer command in lme4 package to do logistic regression (mixed effects model). I use the following command lmer(ISH ~ArrayPathology2, random=~1|PatientID, data=HSDB4.noNA, family="binomial") where ISH is outcome(0 or 1), ArrayPathology2 is the variable of interest(factor), PatientID is random effect(factor), and

Hi, I'm trying to implement a new backend for an embedded CISC processor. Therefore I thought that it makes sense to take X86 target as a basis, to save some time. But when I look into the X86InstrInfo.td, I have a very strong feeling that it is one of the most complex instruction set descriptions compared to other targets. I can imagine that this is due to the complexity of X86's

As part of the LLVM build, burg is now built. It is located in llvm/utils/Burg. This is intended to aid development on different build platforms. -Chris http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/

Burg now uses the same build system as the rest of the llvm system. It sends it's files into the correct BUILD_ROOT, and can build seperate debug, release, and profile versions as well. The only user of burg (lib/Target/Sparc) will automatically use the correct binary from your BUILD_ROOT. This is implemented with the following change sets:

Hi list, using dovecot in a more complex environment nearly always requires use of ACLs and shared mailboxes/folders. Now, to make life more easy for the users, we can use 'dovecot-shared' files to eable per-user \seen-flagging. Is it possible to make this issue configurable in the dovecot config, something like "always keep a 'dovecot-shared' file in users maildir, even if

hi everybody, got a strange issue with 1.2.4 on SLES11. When listing the user's available subscriptions with any client, every shared mailbox that can be subscribed is listed twice, once with it's correct name, 'folder' for example. the second appereance is without the last letter of the name, 'folde' for example. strange behaviour, since this happens with any client. i

Hi folks, i'm using 3.0.30 on Debian etch, one big share (~250 G) with a separate recycler, built with the vfs object. Files which are deleted are moved to that recycler, now my question: Are files that are copied/moved to another share also moved to the recycler? Thanks in advance, i.A. Hendrik Pahl Systemingenieur -- LWsystems GmbH & Co. KG ++ http://www.lw-systems.de/impressum

The machinery around the bison call in the Makefile does not work for me. From the source file gram.yc, my bison (version 1.28) generates files gram.yc.tab.h and gram.yc.tab.c instead of gram.tab.cc and gram.tab.hc. My fix is to use the -o option to tell bison what to name the outputs. -- Casey Carter Casey at Carter.net ccarter at uiuc.edu AIM: cartec69 -------------- next part

Hi the list, I am writing a package in S4 and I do not manage to understand a bug. The "R CMD check" and the "R CMD build" both work. Here is links to the package (not on CRAN yet for the raison that I explain bellow): http://christophe.genolini.free.fr/aTelecharger/kml_0.5.zip http://christophe.genolini.free.fr/aTelecharger/kml_0.5.tar.gz Then I install the package and I

Hello List, We've upgraded our Dovecot system from 1.2.4 to 2.0.12. If someone now accesses an inbox of another user at the shared namespace, the folder will be shown as: shared/martin/INBOX The 1.2 installation has shown the folder like shared/martin Is it possible to achieve the "old" behavior? ** Configuration of the namespaces * dovecot 1.2 namespace private

# BUG 1: returns empty vector if no NAs present > nona <- 1:10 > na.omit(nona) numeric(0) na.omit.default() has two lines where object[-omit] is used, where omit represents positions of NAs and thus without NAs omit = numeric(0) and since -numeric(0) = numeric(0) object[-omit] = numeric(0) It looks like an earlier version of na.omit.default had 'omit' defined as

This message is for those familiar with the survey package. I need to fit a weighted Cox model to accommodate the sampling weights as I have a case-control study with controls sampled at random from a database in a ratio 2:1 to cases (whom were all sampled). I want to make sure I am using the right svydesign syntax to specify this sampling design. Can anyone please check if the statement below is

The automated tests seems not run periodically. Some builds are even broken (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/testresults/X86-niobe/), and some failed (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/testresults/SparcV9/). Will there be another automated test be scheduled before the next release? On 11/10/05, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Frequently releasing software can be a good thing. Especially

Hi, I have a fairly simple repeated measures-type data set I've been attempting to analyze using the lme function in the nlme package. Repeated searches here and other places lead me to believe I have specified my model correctly. However, I am having trouble with post-hoc tests. From what I gather, other people are successfully using the glht function from the multcomp package to

Didn't SparcV9 backend implement list scheduling? 2005/12/16, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org>: > On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, thean kiat sew wrote: > > I am planning to use list scheduling on LLVM instructions. > > Any recommendation on how to start ? As in which codes in LLVM that I need > > to look at. > > We don't currently have a list scheduler in the