similar to: The most efficient way to implement an integer based power function pow in LLVM

VS2013 support is dropped in about 1 week from now :) On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:37 PM Mueller-Roemer, Johannes Sebastian < Johannes.Sebastian.Mueller-Roemer at igd.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Visual Studio up to and including VS2013 implements > std::chrono::high_resolution_clock in an absolutely unusable manner (it is > a very low resolution clock…) [1]. Also, division is implemented

Hi all, We're considering using std::chrono more heavily in lldb. However, A quick search of the llvm, clang, and lld codebases shos almost zero usage of chrono. I wanted to see if this was for technical reasons (eg some compiler doesn't support it well) or simply because nobody has needed it yet. If it's the former then I'd like to be aware of the issues so we don't fall into

A while back llvm::format() was introduced that made it possible to combine printf-style formatting with llvm streams. However, this still comes with all the risks and pitfalls of printf. Everyone is no-doubt familiar with these problems, but here are just a few anyway: 1. *Not type-safe.* Not all compilers warn when you mess up the format specifier. And when you're writing your own

Hi, Current llvm-gcc cannot emit llvm intrinsic function like llvm.pow.* and llvm.sin.* For example: double foo(double x, double y) { return pow(x,y); } will compiled into ll: define double @foo(double %x, double %y) { %tmp3 = tail call double @pow( double %x, double %y ) ret double %tmp3 } This is not consistent with llvm language reference. -------------- next part -------------- An

Hi, > Current llvm-gcc cannot emit llvm intrinsic function like llvm.pow.* and > llvm.sin.* > For example: > > double foo(double x, double y) { > return pow(x,y); > } > > will compiled into ll: > > define double @foo(double %x, double %y) { > %tmp3 = tail call double @pow( double %x, double %y ) > ret double %tmp3 > } > > This is not

2007/11/22, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>: > > Hi, > > > Current llvm-gcc cannot emit llvm intrinsic function like llvm.pow.* and > > llvm.sin.* > > For example: > > > > double foo(double x, double y) { > > return pow(x,y); > > } > > > > will compiled into ll: > > > > define double @foo(double %x, double %y) {

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 > Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I want an efficient way to implement function pow in LLVM instead of >> invoking pow() math built-in. For algorithm part, I am clear for the

PS: It is possible that the C front-end doesn't need to explicitly produce BUILT_IN_POW because it is auto-synthesized somehow from a call to "pow". I wouldn't know. One way to find out is to compile a testcase and rummage around inside the gcc trees when they hit llvm-convert.

Full_Name: Hallgeir Grinde Version: 2.1.1 OS: Windows XP Submission from: (NULL) (144.127.1.1) While using lm(y~(x*z*c*...*v)^2) R crashes/closes if the numbers of variables are at least 8.

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/12/2017 9:33 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: >>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 >>> Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

Hi, You might need to check library(boot).? I have never used that before.? So, I can't comment much.? It is better to post on R-help list.? I had seen your postings on Nabble in the past.? Unfortunately those postings were not accepted in R-help.? You have to directly post at ? r-help at r-project.org after registering at: https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help ?

Hi, 2007/11/22, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>: > > PS: It is possible that the C front-end doesn't need to > explicitly produce BUILT_IN_POW because it is auto-synthesized > somehow from a call to "pow". I wouldn't know. One way to > find out is to compile a testcase and rummage around inside > the gcc trees when they hit llvm-convert. Yes, they

Dear R users, I have a data with 1000 variables named "x1", "x2", ..., "x1000", and I want to construct a formula like this format: ~x1+x2+...+x1000+x1:x2+x1:x3+x999:x1000+log(x1)+...+log(x1000) That is: the base variables followed by all interaction terms and all base feature log-transformations. I know I can use several paste functions to construct it. But is

I have a very simple test case on Windows that shows some surprising behavior. This doesn't seem to be a problem on Linux. The example is: #include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> double heat(double Pr) { return pow(Pr, 0.33); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { double Nu = heat(291.00606180486119); printf("%.20f\n", Nu); } I've tested with MinGW's gcc.exe

#### I checked through every 3 factor * 3 loading case. #### While, 4 factor * 3 loading failed. #### the data is 6 factor * 3 loading require(sem); cor18<-read.moments(); 1 .68 1 .60 .58 1 .01 .10 .07 1 .12 .04 .06 .29 1 .06 .06 .01 .35 .24 1 .09 .13 .10 .05 .03 .07 1 .04 .08 .16 .10 .12 .06 .25 1 .06 .09 .02 .02 .09 .16 .29 .36 1 .23 .26 .19 .05 .04 .04 .08 .09 .09 1 .11 .13 .12 .03 .05 .03

Does anyone know how to pass a list of parameters into a function? for example: somefun=function(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8,x9){ ans=x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8+x9 return(ans) } somefun(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) # I would like this to work: temp=c(x3=3,x4=4,x5=5,x6=6,x7=7,x8=8,x9=9) somefun(x1=1,x2=2,temp) # OR I would like this to work: temp=list(x3=3,x4=4,x5=5,x6=6,x7=7,x8=8,x9=9)

Dear friends, I'm doing a simulation on logistic regression model, but the programs can't work well,please help me to correct it and give some suggestions. My programs: data<-matrix(rnorm(400),ncol=8) #sample size is 50 data<-data.frame(data) names(data)<-c(paste("x",1:8,sep="")) #8 independent variables,x1-x8; #logistic regression model is

Dette er en melding med flere deler i MIME-format. --=_alternative 004613C000257091_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" And some more informastion I forgot. R does not crash if I write out the formula: set.seed(123) x1 <- runif(1000) x2 <- runif(1000) x3 <- runif(1000) x4 <- runif(1000) x5 <- runif(1000) x6 <- runif(1000) x7 <- runif(1000) x8 <-

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I On Oct 11, 2016, at 6:22 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > A while back llvm::format() was introduced that made it possible to > combine printf-style formatting with llvm streams. However, this still > comes with all the risks

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 12, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Steve (Numerics) Canon <scanon at apple.com <mailto:scanon at apple.com>> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>