similar to: [LLVMdev] bitwise ops on booleans

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com> > To: "Sanjay Patel" <spatel at rotateright.com>, "Clang" <cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu>, llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, > joerg at britannica.bec.de > Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 8:55:22 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] bitwise ops on booleans > > >

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:51:38PM -0600, Sanjay Patel wrote: > > Assuming the transform is correct, what is the recommended way to write > > this in C/C++ to achieve the desired effect: we want both comparisons to > be > > evaluated (do *not* want short-circuiting)? > >

> On Jan 7, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > On 01/07/2015 12:05 PM, Matt Arsenault wrote: >> >>> On Jan 7, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 01/07/2015 11:52 AM, Matt Arsenault wrote:

> On Jan 14, 2016, at 4:49 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:56 PM, John McCall via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > C 6.3.2.3p7 (N1548) says: > A pointer to an object type may be converted to a pointer to a > different object type. If the resulting pointer is not

Full_Name: Hin-Tak Leung Version: R 2.2.1 OS: x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu Submission from: (NULL) (131.111.186.92) rbind/cbind is unimplemented for raw (RAWSXP) types. I have a working patch implementing the functionality, to follow. --please do not edit the information below-- Version: platform = x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu arch = x86_64 os = linux-gnu system = x86_64, linux-gnu status = major

C 6.3.2.3p7 (N1548) says: A pointer to an object type may be converted to a pointer to a different object type. If the resulting pointer is not correctly aligned) for the referenced type, the behavior is undefined. C++ [expr.reinterpret.cast]p7 (N4527) defines pointer conversions in terms of conversions from void*: An object pointer can be explicitly converted to an object pointer of a

Hi Jiefei and Duncan, I suspect what is likely happening is that one of ENSURE_NAMEDMAX or MARK_NOT_MUTABLE are being hit for x. These used to set named to 3, but now set it to 7 (ie the previous and current NAMEDMAX value, respectively). Because these are macros rather than C functions, its not easy to figure out why one of them is being invoked from do_isvector (a cursory exploration

Re ENSURE_NAMEDMAX, I am unsure but think this happens in (src/eval.c at 492): static SEXP forcePromise(SEXP e) { ??? if (PRVALUE(e) == R_UnboundValue) { ??? /* ... SNIP ...*/ ??? val = eval(PRCODE(e), PRENV(e)); ??? /* ... SNIP ...*/ ??? SET_PRSEEN(e, 0); ?? ?SET_PRVALUE(e, val); ?? ?ENSURE_NAMEDMAX(val);???????????????? <<<<<<< HERE ?? ?SET_PRENV(e, R_NilValue); ??? } ???

I noticed something recently that I thought was odd: delayedAssign("x", { Sys.sleep(5); 1 }) x ## Hit Ctrl-C within the first second or 2 gives me: > delayedAssign("x", { Sys.sleep(5); 1 }) > x ## Hit Ctrl-C within the first second or two > x Error: recursive default argument reference > My only problem here is that now I'm stuck---there's no way

On 1/8/2015 1:55 AM, Philip Reames wrote: >>>> I think the problems aren’t so much that accessing 0 doesn’t work >>>> (although I imagine there are problems with that), but expectations >>>> of comparison with null. The main problem I’m aware of is >>>> comparisons with null pointers. The first global object in >>>> addrspace(3) will

> On Jan 7, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > On 01/07/2015 11:52 AM, Matt Arsenault wrote: >> >>> On Jan 7, 2015, at 2:25 PM, Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com <mailto:resistor at mac.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I'm not aware of any such restriction, and I know of several LLVM based systems

Hi, in my person model, I have a enumeration field "role" that take bits like 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, ..... they represent person roles(eg: admin(1), QA(2), manager(4) .... ). Each person can take on multiple roles. say there''s person A that''s both a admin and QA(the role value is "3") so if I search like "Person.find_by_content(''role:(1))", I

Hello, How can I do bitwise AND operations on a variable? I want to check the bits set in the HANGUPCAUSE, but can't find a way to do it. -- Alex Hermann

On 2/7/08, Ralph Giles <ralph.giles@artifex.com> wrote: > And theora, remember. Actually, I thought I remember derf doing that. And there it was on Trac's timeline. Look at changeset 14369: "Copy the libogg bitpacker directly into libtheoradec. Due to the vagaries of -fPIC and dynamic linking, we wasting a _huge_ amount of time on function call overhead. We also take the

It's very small, maybe it could be made a separate statically linked lib ? Or some of it inlined. That said, libogg is small too, and some of the routines in there are quite small as well.

On 09/02/2008, Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > Yes, all that is reasonable. The original argument was that we need a > library anyway, no one noticed the function call overhead, and using > libogg simplified the embedding. > > Now, we'd like to remove libogg entirely as a dependency to avoid > confusion when using other containers, but that's an api change...

Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves wrote: > And IF that kind of performance can be gained in libvorbis too, the > question is, what are we waiting for? I doubt the performance gain would be that large. Theora had the fun little situation where it was thunking into the big endian version of some bitpacker functions which were one-line calls to the little endian version. Because gcc seemed to be

Hi, I would like to xor (bitwise) two matrices filled with binary values (0,1). The result of such XOR is expected to be 0,1. But apparently neither of xor nor bitXor is working in this case. I got ": binary operation on non-conformable arrays" error message when I used xor (M1,M2) . The problem with bitXor(M1,M2) is that it just truncates the result into a vector rather than a

Hi, I want to compute the bitwise 'and' between two values of type int1:  %x = and %a, %b  . Which is the LLVM instruction that creates this? I only found the APInt class, whose constructor is:  APInt(unsigned numBits, uint64_t val, bool isSigned = false) and which provides the bitwise AND operation: APInt  llvm::APIntOps::And (const APInt &LHS, const APInt &RHS)   Bitwise

Hi, I have a question about unsigned bitwise shift. According the C99 6.5.7.4 The result of E1 << E2 is E1 left-shifted E2 bit positions; vacated bits are filled with zeros. If E1 has an unsigned type, the value of the result is E1 × 2^E2, reduced modulo one more than the maximum value representable in the result type. So if unsigned b = 0x80000000; unsigned a = b << 1; a will