similar to: [LLVMdev] Tagged (Disjoint) Unions

Hi Clemens, On 02/02/12 14:25, Clemens Hammacher wrote: > On 2/2/12 1:51 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: ... >> what do you mean by "copied over to the main module"? If you want to add >> additional IR to the main module then you should link it in using the linker. > > I think that the linker would indeed be able to remap the types correctly, but > the main obstacle here

On 2/2/12 1:51 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > On 02/02/12 13:30, Clemens Hammacher wrote: >> On 2/2/12 1:15 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>> I have to ask: why are you writing these modules out as separate bc files? >> >> I knew that someone would ask that ;) >> We need to have separate modules during runtime. One of them contains the code >> that is actually JIT

On 2/2/12 2:32 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > On 02/02/12 14:25, Clemens Hammacher wrote: >> On 2/2/12 1:51 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > ... >>> what do you mean by "copied over to the main module"? If you want to add >>> additional IR to the main module then you should link it in using the >>> linker. >> >> I think that the linker would indeed

In another thread on this list, various wild allegations have been made, relating to the New York Times article on R. I object both to the subject line and to the content of several of the messages, and will not repeat or quote any of that content. It smacks to me of mischief making. Discussion has centered around the following quote from the NY Times article: ?According to them, the

I am trying to create a boxed tagged datatype for a language where it is necessary to resolve the type at runtime. If I were writing an interpreter in C- it would most likely look something like this- struct { unsigned tag; union { long Int; double Float; .... } } Is there a standard way for constructing a type like this in LLVM? Thanks again.

2009/6/29 Carter Cheng <carter_cheng at yahoo.com>: > > I am trying to create a boxed tagged datatype for a language where it is necessary to resolve the type at runtime. If I were writing an interpreter in C- it would most likely look something like this- > > Is there a standard way for constructing a type like this in LLVM? > Well, you can always ask bitter melon, who

Hi Matthew, On Feb 15, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Matthew Huck wrote: > Hi, > It doesn't compile with yasm, or nasm Where did you get the idea that "Intel syntax" means NASM? LLVM actually produces assembly files that can be fed to GAS, or to LLVM's MC framework. (In fact, it's missing a .intel_syntax directive so GAS knows it needs to assemble instructions according to

Hi Clemens, On 02/02/12 13:30, Clemens Hammacher wrote: > Hi Chris, > thanks for your answer! > > On 2/2/12 1:15 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> The linker has to solve the exact same problem (read multiple .bc files and >> unify types across them). This is the impetus behind TypeMapTy in >> lib/Linker/LinkModules.cpp. You'll probably need to do something like that.

Hi Chris, thanks for your answer! On 2/2/12 1:15 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > The linker has to solve the exact same problem (read multiple .bc files and unify types across them). This is the impetus behind TypeMapTy in lib/Linker/LinkModules.cpp. You'll probably need to do something like that. I already looked into that. The linker is using the GlobalValues of both modules to identify

Thanks both. I looked over the getelementptr and bitcast documentation but I am still a bit confused by one point. lets say i have something like this. union { long Int; double float; long* IntRef; } Since pointer sizes are platform dependent if I am trying to use the union in question with an extern C function is it possible to make write the single definition in a platform independent way?

Hi guys again, it seems I haven't been doing the maximum likelihood estimation correctly. I quote below, can someone explain to me please what does it mean that the 2nd and 3rd derivatives of the function equals zero and how to compute that in R. "We have our initial estimated, subjective parameters for the gamma mixture and we have our likelihood that is the mixture of negative

Hi, As some of you know, I started implementing the SMTP submission proxy a few years ago. It acts as a front-end for any MTA, adding the necessary functionality for an SMTP submission service, also known as a Mail Submission Agent (MSA) (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6409). The main reason I created this, back then, was implementing the BURL capability (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4468). The

All, I've devised a way to toss a coin three times and record the number of heads, then use the table command to summarize the number of time 0, 1, 2, or 3 heads were obtained. n <- 100 x <- sample(c("H","T"),3*n,replace=TRUE) dim(x) <- c(3,n) num_heads <- apply(x,2,function(x) sum(x=="H")) table(num_heads)/n What I'd like to do next is run this

On Thu, 2003-12-25 at 21:35, Josh Coalson wrote: > --- jason <jason@doomba.com> wrote: > > is there a cuesheet syntax document someplace? > it's not really standardized that well. there are some links > here: http://flac.sourceforge.net/documentation.html (search > for --cuesheet) hmmmm.... i just reread the faq and your right... i'm kind of losing interest in

Hi Sebastian, > I think the crucial point is that node4 isn't aware of its own > restriction (after the first R2 reduction). > If you normalize the new matrix (shifting costs in the adjacent vector > until each row/column has minima 0) after a R2 reduction of a node with > infinite spill cost the problem should disappear. <snip> > Did you consider this option? We

I'm coming from the AMOS world and am wondering if there is a simple way to do multiple hypothesis testing in the manner of BIC analyses in AMOS using the sem package in R. I've read the documentation, but don't see anything in there except for basic BIC scores. Perhaps someone has devised a simple way to compare the relative likelihood of all possible path-fittings within a

Dear UseRs: I intend to write a package to handle the basic operations a revenue management analyst has to deal with on a regular basis (e.g., demand untruncation, capacity allocation, pricing decisions, etc.). Following the directions posted by Peter Rossi (Making R Packages under Windows: A Tutorial, January 2006) I was able to build an interim package that currently consists of one simple

Okay, I got off my duff this week and have been finishing Mongrel support for IOWA. I now have two handlers that I need to test. One is similar to the Rails handler, passing request handling to IOWA threads in the same process, and the other allows one or more Mongrel processes to pass requests to one or more separate IOWA processes, with session affinity. Is there any set of standard sorts of

Specifically what I am asking is, if I have a computer named ralph$ who is uidNumber 678 in ou=Computers and I have a user who is uidNumber 678 in ou=People, will this cause problems? Must the different sets of uidNumbers be disjoint acrossed different ou's?

Hello, Is there any way I can use the gregexpr functions (or a different function) in a manner that will also return overlapping (i.e. non disjoint) regular expressions? For instance, when running gregexpr("AAA","AAAAAA"), I get two matches, one at position 1 and one at position 4. I'd like to receive 4 matches at positions 1, 2, 3 and 4. Thanks, Schraga