similar to: [LLVMdev] Preferring to use GCC instead of LLVM

On Tuesday 13 May 2008 06:49:34 kr512 wrote: > Jon Harrop wrote: > > Can you explain why you would like to generate DLLs on the > > customer's computer rather than using LLVM as a JIT > > compiler? > > Customers/clients unhappy with the inefficiency, extra CPU > and RAM usage, and performance penalty of JIT. They require > a faster, more efficient solution.

Jon Harrop wrote: > Can you explain why you would like to generate DLLs on the > customer's computer rather than using LLVM as a JIT > compiler? Customers/clients unhappy with the inefficiency, extra CPU and RAM usage, and performance penalty of JIT. They require a faster, more efficient solution. The solution is to fully compile programs to native code at the time of

I wrote: > The Solution: Make LLVM usable as a DLL or SLL in Windoze, > capable of generating a finished ready-to-execute .EXE or > .DLL file, without requiring that MinGW or Cygwin be > installed first. Michael T. Richter replied: > You will be welcomed with open arms by the LLVM community > when you write this. I look forward to your announcement > with bated breath.

me22.ca wrote: > You said that if I have to install GCC, you might as well > just use it for everything. That statement very clearly > doesn't apply anymore, since it's binutils that's the > dependency. Or if you still stand by it, it means that > you consider GCC to also be "incomplete". How do I get the necessary binutils on Windoze? Install MinGW or

Chris Lattner wrote: > If you'd prefer to use GCC, go for it. No one is forcing > you to use LLVM. No, we would prefer to use LLVM, but a missing part in LLVM makes it difficult. It would be wonderful if this missing part could be supplied. > You are seriously ignorant of what LLVM is all about. > Please go inform yourself. Alright, I read some more on llvm.org and it

Oh another thing, consider this question that some people will be asking: Why not use GCC to do what LLVM does, and skip the hassle of using LLVM entirely? ESPECIALLY considering that LLVM cannot be used without GCC. Even if you are using LLVM as a back-end only, for compiling LLVM bytecode only, GCC is still required to convert the "llc" output assembly .S file into a

On May 10, 2008, at 7:55 PM, kr512 wrote: >> You are seriously ignorant of what LLVM is all about. >> Please go inform yourself. > > Alright, I read some more on llvm.org and it confirmed what > I was saying: > http://www.llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#tutorial > > See at the end where it says: > ----------- > 6.Compile the program to native assembly using

Tanya Lattner wrote: > Your "point" has been made (regardless if the point has > changed over time). My point did not change, rather I just used the wrong name in my original message, or I stated my point in a manner less specific than people here would have preferred. > You feel the need to keep repeating that LLVM is not a > COMPLETE backend. A number of people did

Owen Anderson wrote: > There's nothing particularly stopping you from having your > installation package include copies of gas and ld, I disagree. gas and ld are not available on Windoze, except via MinGW. Yes I can make or tell my customers to install MinGW, but if MinGW is installed, then I don't need LLVM. (More about this further ahead) > You're welcome to think

Not that I sympathize with the OP's manners but... Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> writes: > On May 10, 2008, at 7:55 PM, kr512 wrote: > >> See how gcc is invoked to generate the final executable >> file. This means LLVM is an incomplete backend, >> unfortunately. >> > That's only a convenience. GCC generates assembly code too and calls

Hi, I just came across the following issue regarding mixed effects models: In a longitudinal study individuals (variable ind) are observed for some response variable. One explanatory variable, f, entering the model as fixed effect, is a (2-level) factor. The expression of that factor is constant for each individual across time (say, the sex of the individual). ind enters the model as grouping

This may be an unpopular opinion (and I don’t have the full context on those specific issues), but I believe that these are an abuse of XFAIL, and should probably be written in terms of REQUIRES instead of XFAIL. I believe XFAIL tests actually execute, and are just marked as expected failure. If a test is not expected to ever succeed, we shouldn’t bother running it, which is what the REQUIRES

Hello, from a software I have the following output in xml (see below): It is a series of matrices, for each age one. I have 3 categories (might vary in the application), hence, 3x3 matrices where each element gives the probability of transition from i to j. I would like read this data into R (preferably in a list, where each list element is one of the age specific matrices) and - after altering

On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > Dear list, > > At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working > session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided > it would be worthwhile to schedule regular sync-up calls in order to > better co-ordinate ongoing work between different developers. This is >

Dear R users, I am using lmer combined with AIC model selection and averaging (in the MuMIn package) to try and assess how isotope values (which indicate diet) vary within a population of animals. I have multiple measures from individuals (variable 'Tattoo') and multiple individuals within social groups within 4 locations (A, B, C ,D) crucially I am interested if there are

Dear all, I noticed the following while playing around with fitting log-linear models to contingency tables using R 1.8.1, but the problem also exists under R 1.9.0. A reproducible example uses the following contingency table: > library(MASS) > data(quine) > tmp <- with(quine, expand.grid(Eth=levels(Eth), Sex=levels(Sex), + Lrn=levels(Lrn), Age=levels(Age)))

I am executing a Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance with 1 DV (LOCOMOTOR RESPONSE), 2 Within-Subjects Factors (AGE, ACOUSTIC CONDITION), and 1 Between-Subjects Factor (SEX). Does anyone know whether the between-subjects factor (SEX) belongs in the Error Term of the aov or not? And if it does belong, where in the Error Term does it go? The 3 possible scenarios are listed below: e.g., 1.

Dieter Menne pointed out that the (small) xml attachment didn't make it. Here is an in-line version (see end of message). Let's hope it works this time. I'm struggling with interpreting XML files created by ADODB as data.frames and I'm looking for advice. Note: This xlm contains a result set which comes from a rectangular data array. I've been trying to play with

Dear R-ers, my task is to simple: to assign cases to desired groupings based on the combined values on 2 variables. I can think of 3 methods of doing it. Method 1 seems to me pretty r-like, but it requires a lot of lines of code - onerous. Method 2 is a loop, so not very good - as it loops through all rows of mydata. Method 3 is a loop but loops through fewer lines, so it seems to me more

Hi, I have recently been attempting to find the LD50 from two predicted fits (For male and females) in a Generalised linear model which models the effect of both sex + logdose (and sex*logdose interaction) on proportion survival (formula = y ~ ldose * sex, family = "binomial", data = dat (y is the survival data)). I can obtain the LD50 for females using the dose.p() command in the MASS