similar to: [LLVMdev] Integer Range

Hi! Alls ???? i have read code of xapian more than one month,i leant a lot from your code both form design of search engine and code details. ???? however, something make me in a puzzle. ? ?? Take? RefCntBase as an example, it seems that it is a "kernel" of xapian, as many classes inherit from it. But,what is it funtion? why is it so important? ???? Another confusion is about

Hi! Alls ???? i have read code of xapian more than one month,i leant a lot from your code both form design of search engine and code details. ???? however, something make me in a puzzle. ? ?? Take? RefCntBase as an example, it seems that it is a "kernel" of xapian, as many classes inherit from it. But,what is it funtion? why is it so important? ???? Another confusion is about

Hi all, I am creating Xapian documents and adding a unix timestamp to each document as a value using the doc.add_value method. When I search my Xapian database, I want the option to only search documents with a timestamp within the last year. Is there a way to search across documents with a value greater than a specified value string? Or is there a better way of doing something like this? Any

Hi, I upgraded the Visual Studio SLN file to work with 2005 and had to make some changes. The first two have to do with the fact that the debug implementation of 2005's STL does all sort of validation, that's why they didn’t show up on 2003. I'm not set up for patch submission yet, but if somebody has time to review these changes that'd be greatly appreciated. Meanwhile

On 15 January 2015 at 10:49, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com> > wrote: > >> Would it be wrong to generate the llvm.assume IR suggested below? in GVN? >> > > I think so... Because: > > One very small tweak you could make would be to add an llvm.assume inside

Thanks that helped :). I am still trying to cover add_value some more though since I seem to not understand it totally. I guess it is because I am used to Lucene and Sphinx and Solr and it appears that Xapian seems to attach the type of value stored more on add_value. Like for example I am still a bit confused on how slotno actually works and what it actually is. I think the main thing is

libswfdec/swfdec_as_strings.c | 2 libswfdec/swfdec_sprite_movie_as.c | 22 ++-- libswfdec/swfdec_xml.c | 117 ++++++++++++++++------- libswfdec/swfdec_xml.h | 8 - libswfdec/swfdec_xml_node.c | 32 +++--- libswfdec/swfdec_xml_node.h | 2

QueryParser is great, but I would like to make a query myself, so I can filter results by a specified value (in this case restricting by epoch time after a certain value) My code looks like this, and compiles, and appears like it should work according to the perl source:     my $query = $qp->parse_query($querystr);     if ($datefilter) {         my $filterepoch = time() - ($datefilter

Author: duvander Date: Sun May 31 17:34:27 2009 New Revision: 12 Modified: trunk/source/mxn.cloudmade.core.js Log: Implemented most Cloudmade functions. Still requires image, tile and KML/GeoRSS overlays Modified: trunk/source/mxn.cloudmade.core.js ============================================================================== --- trunk/source/mxn.cloudmade.core.js (original) +++

Hi, I was working on alias analysis using LLVM-2.6 previously. But I just downloaded LLVM-2.7 and found AndersenAA is not there. What happened for andersen's IPA alias analysis? Has it been deleted for some reason? Thanks. Lei -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hola Jaap, I'm curious which version of the source are you working with? It sounds like you and I were working on the same problem yesterday, but I didn't see those particular compiler errors. (I saw a couple of other ones for which I submitted a patch). I did see errors like the ones you saw with the CVS LLVM 2.0 sources a while back, namely the missing < operator and the debug STL

PredicateSimplifier is a pretty interesting pass, but it doesn't look like opt invokes it at any standard -Ox level, and so I assume that llvm-gcc also does not use this pass? If that is right, I'm curious about why this is the case -- does it simply not provide enough code speedup to compensate for the increase in compile time? Also, a colleague and I (we both teach advanced

libswfdec/swfdec_as_strings.c | 7 + libswfdec/swfdec_asbroadcaster.c | 10 + libswfdec/swfdec_initialize.as | 1 libswfdec/swfdec_initialize.h | 8 - libswfdec/swfdec_net_stream.c | 10 + libswfdec/swfdec_player.c

Hi John, John Regehr wrote: > PredicateSimplifier is a pretty interesting pass, but it doesn't look > like opt invokes it at any standard -Ox level, and so I assume that > llvm-gcc also does not use this pass? If that is right, I'm curious > about why this is the case -- does it simply not provide enough code > speedup to compensate for the increase in compile time? I

Hi Wei, Wei Mi wrote: > Sanjoy and Andy, thanks a lot for your suggestions. > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Andrew Trick<atrick at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 11:30 PM, Sanjoy Das<sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Wei, >>> >>> I've not seen GCC's SCEV so I cannot

Hi all, I'm hitting the following assert in PredicateSimplifier.cpp:961 : assert(!CR.isSingleElement() && "Refusing to store single element."); If I ignore it the generated code appears correct so I'm not sure what this assert is supposed to be for. Am I doing something wrong on my end or is this a superfluous assert or it really indicates an LLVM bug? The

The Wine development release 2.17 is now available. What's new in this release (see below for details): - Better support for grayscale mode in DirectWrite. - Per-application StartupWMClass in desktop files. - Virtual memory compatibility improvements. - Palette handling improvements in WindowsCodecs. - Reply messages improvements in WebServices. - Various bug fixes. The source is

There's some interest in my "auto-simplifier", which is nice :), so let me explain a bit about it. On 19/01/11 19:35, Sandeep Patel wrote: > You've mentioned your auto-simplifier a few times now and curiosity is > getting the better of me. Can you explain it a bit more? On 20/01/11 00:32, Nuno Lopes wrote: > Just out of curiosity, what's this auto-simplifier?

Would it be wrong to generate the llvm.assume IR suggested below? in GVN? Given more info via the AssumptionCache, InstCombine can then do more optimizing. On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > On 12/04/2014 02:19 AM, Lars Rasmusson SICS wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm compiling a large code base that uses tagged data, with

> Predsimplify is believed to have bugs (it results in miscompiled > programs) and certainly isn't efficient (it was written before much of > include/ADT). Finally, predsimplify is likely to go away once I or > someone else writes a proper VRP pass. Whoever does this, I strongly encourage looking into using (or at least providing optional support for) the Apron library: