Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Passing Arguments to External Function Call in llvm pass"
2008 Feb 22
1
[LLVMdev] tutorial typos
There were some typos in the tutorial. This patch should fix them:
index b7f968b..50619e0 100644
--- a/docs/tutorial/LangImpl2.html
+++ b/docs/tutorial/LangImpl2.html
@@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ public:
/// of arguments the function takes).
class PrototypeAST {
std::string Name;
- std::vector< Args;
+ std::vector<std::string> Args;
public:
PrototypeAST(const std::string
2013 Jun 18
0
[LLVMdev] Getting the memory address of all operands on an expression
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Abhinash Jain <omnia at mailinator.com>wrote:
>
> But before becoming part of the expressions, the registers will actually
> fetch some value from memory, through Load operations.
>
This is not true; the virtual registers need not be loaded from memory. You
may find <
2013 Jun 18
3
[LLVMdev] Getting the memory address of all operands on an expression
> in LLVM IR, the operands of most expression are registers, so don't have a
memory address.
Yes I agree with your this statement,
But before becoming part of the expressions, the registers will actually
fetch some value from memory, through Load operations.
as shown in example "r3=r1+r2" will be the expression, where registers such
as r1 and r2 contains (fetch) the values from
2013 Jul 26
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM ERROR : Invalid instruction
@Jim Grosbach,
Is there anyway to resolve it???
--
View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/LLVM-ERROR-Invalid-instruction-tp59856p59865.html
Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2013 Jul 26
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM ERROR : Invalid instruction
On Jul 26, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Abhinash Jain <omnia at mailinator.com> wrote:
> Is there anyway to resolve it???
1. Teach the cpp backend how to handle it.
2. Compile with -fno-exceptions to turn off exceptions.
--
Stephen Checkoway
2009 Aug 23
0
[LLVMdev] x86_64 darwin multilib gfortran testresults
Using the proposed patch for enabling the i386 multilib under the x86_64-apple-darwin
build...
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-August/025040.html
the following gfortran testsuite results are obtained...
Native configuration is x86_64-apple-darwin10
=== gfortran tests ===
Running target unix/-m32
FAIL: gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
FAIL:
2009 Jan 19
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-gfortran test results
The current llvm/llvm-gcc4.2 svn is now fixed with
respect to the extra warnings that were being emitted
by the gfortran compiler. The gfortran testsuite results
under Intel Darwin9 are appended below.
Jack
Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9
=== gfortran tests ===
Running target unix/-m32
FAIL: gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
FAIL:
2008 Nov 02
1
[LLVMdev] llvm-2.4 prerelease gfortran results
Building the prerelease of llvm-gcc 2.4 on Intel darwin9
with the following patch...
--- llvm-gcc-4.2-2.3.999-20081024.source/gcc/stub-c.c.org 2008-10-30 18:55:45.000000000 -0400
+++ llvm-gcc-4.2-2.3.999-20081024.source/gcc/stub-c.c 2008-10-30 18:57:29.000000000 -0400
@@ -157,3 +157,27 @@
{
gcc_assert(0);
}
+
+
+bool cvt_utf8_utf16 (const unsigned char *, size_t, unsigned char **,
+
2008 Jun 09
1
Cross-validation in R
Folks; I am having a problem with the cv.glm and would appreciate someone
shedding some light here. It seems obvious but I cannot get it. I did read
the manual, but I could not get more insight. This is a database containing
3363 records and I am trying a cross-validation to understand the process.
When using the cv.glm, code below, I get mean of perr1 of 0.2336 and SD of
0.000139. When using a
2012 Dec 11
1
Rprof causing R to crash
I'm trying to use Rprof() to identify bottlenecks and speed up a particullary
slow section of code which reads in a portion of a tif file and compares
each of the values to values of predictors used for model fitting. I've
written up an example that anyone can run. Generally temp would be a
section of a tif read into a data.frame and used later for other processing.
The first portion
2013 May 27
0
choose the lines
Hi,
Try this:
dat1<- read.csv("dat7.csv",header=TRUE,stringsAsFactors=FALSE,sep="\t")
dat.bru<- dat1[!is.na(dat1$evnmt_brutal),]
fun1<- function(dat){???
? ??? lst1<- split(dat,dat$patient_id)
??? lst2<- lapply(lst1,function(x) x[cumsum(x$evnmt_brutal==0)>0,])
??? lst3<- lapply(lst2,function(x) x[!(all(x$evnmt_brutal==1)|all(x$evnmt_brutal==0)),])
???
1999 Sep 02
1
count of factors
Hello,
I was used to count how many times every factor is found the following
way :
(assuming 'vect' is a vector of factors)
tapply(vect,vect,length)
but recently I experienced weird results with this
In fact, my command line was
tapply(ORGMORE[[1]][vect],ORGMORE[[1]][vect],length)
where
- 'vect' is a vector of indices
- 'ORGMORE[[1]]' is a slightly long vector of
2018 May 06
1
adding overall constraint in optim()
Hi Michael,
A few comments
1. To add the constraint sum(wgt.vect=1) you would use the method of
Lagrange multipliers.
What this means is that in addition to the w_i (the components of the
weight variables) you would add an additional variable, call it lambda.
Then you would modify your optim.fun() function to add the term
lambda * (sum(wgt.vect - 1)
2. Are you sure that you have defined
2018 May 03
0
adding overall constraint in optim()
You can't -- at least as I read the docs for ?optim (but I'm pretty
ignorant about this, so maybe there's a way to tweak it so you can).
See here: https://cran.r-project.org/web/views/Optimization.html
for other R optimization capabilities.
Also, given your credentials, the r-sig-finance list might be a
better place for you to post your query.
Cheers,
Bert
Bert Gunter
2008 Jun 10
1
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2-2.3 gfortran failures
Building llvm 2.3 and llvm-gcc4.2-2.3 on Mac OS X 10.5, I am seeing the
following failures remaining in the gcc 4.2.1 gfortran testsuite...
LAST_UPDATED:
Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9
=== gfortran tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O1 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_1.f90 -O2 execution test
FAIL:
2018 May 03
4
adding overall constraint in optim()
Hi ?
This is giving me a headache. I?m trying to do a relatively simple optimization ? actually trying to approximate the output from the Excel Solver function but at roughly 1000x the speed. ?
The optimization parameters look like this. The only trouble is that I want to add a constraint that sum(wgt.vect)=1, and I can?t figure out how to do that in optim.
Mo.vect <-
2001 Feb 19
0
[PATCH]: Broken scp -p option
Hi,
I have found an serious problem when using 'scp -rp'. The usage of
the static buffer "namebuf" together with calling `sink()' recursively
results in overwriting the buffer np points to. This in turn results
in a broken call to `ulimits()' and `chmod'.
This patch solves the problem:
Index: scp.c
===================================================================
2018 May 25
1
MSP430: interrupt vector number out of bounds error in v6/trunk (with patch)
When building with Clang for the MSP430 architecture against headers
distributed with TI MSP GCC, interrupt service routine
interrupt(vector_number) attribute is rejected:
__attribute__ ((interrupt(USCI_A0_VECTOR))) void ISR(void) { }
error: 'interrupt' attribute parameter 48 is out of bounds
This is due to the check in tools/clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclAttr.cpp:5104
unsigned Num
2006 Sep 04
3
Subsetting vectors based on condition
Hello,
I have a question regarding subsetting of vectors. Here's an example of
what I'm trying to do:
vect.1 <- c(76,195, 290, 380)
vect.2 <- c(63, 95, 133, 170, 215, 253, 285, 299, 325, 375)
I would like to subset vect.2 so that it has the same length as vect.1,
and its numbers are the first corresponging higher value compared to
vect.1.
The output should be:
final.output =
2018 May 04
0
adding overall constraint in optim()
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:03 PM, Michael Ashton
<m.ashton at enduringinvestments.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bert. But everyone on that forum wants to use finance tools rather than general optimization stuff! And I am not optimizing a traditional Markowitz mean-variance problem. Plus, smarter people here. :-)
>
I'm very confused by these statements. Most of the "finance tools"