similar to: TargetRegisterInfo::getCommonSubClass bug, perhaps.

Hi, I am trying to read the "credit.lisp" file of the Japanese credit database in UCI repository, but it is in lisp format which I do not know how to read. I have not found how to do that in the foreign library http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Japanese+Credit+Screening <http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Japanese+Credit+Screening> Could anyone help me? Best

Hi, I'm looking for some suggestions on a problem related to the Hexagon backend. Hexagon architecture allows instructions in various formats. For example, we have 3 variations of the add instruction as defined below: ADDrr : r1 = add(r2, r3) --> add 2 32-bit registers ADDrr_p : if(p0) r1 = add(r2, r3) --> predicated version of ADDrr instruction, executed when p0 is true ADDrr_np :

I have some data 'myData' in wide form (attached at the end), and would like to convert it to long form. I wish to have five variables in the result: 1) Subj: factor 2) Group: between-subjects factor (2 levels: s / w) 3) Reference: within-subject factor (2 levels: Me / She) 4) F: within-subject factor (2 levels: F1 / F2) 5) J: within-subject factor (2 levels: J1 / J2) As this is the

Hi, I'd like to understand how register allocation works in the case where an instruction is folded into another one. Where in the code would be a good place to start looking at? After ISEL, one of the instructions has another instruction folded into it, which looks like this t1: i32,i1,i1,i1,i1 = ADDRR TargetFrameIndex:i32<0>, MOVRI:i32,i1,i1 But during the 'Assembly

On Aug 1, 2012, at 1:53 PM, Jyotsna Verma <jverma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > Currently, we rely on switch tables to transform between formats. However, > we would like to have a different mechanism to represent these relationships > instead of switch tables. I am thinking of modeling these relations in > HexagonInstrInfo.td file and use TableGen to generate a table with

Hi R User, I am new in R and trying to create tables with selecting rows randomly (but with replacement) for each group but each group should have same number as original. Is it possible to create it using the following example data set? Your help is highly appreciated. dat1<-structure(list(RegionA = structure(c(1L, 1L, 2L, 3L, 3L, 4L, 5L, 5L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L, 6L),

Hi R Users, I do have very big data sets and wanted to run some of the analyses many times with randomization (1000 times). I have done the analysis using an example data but it need to be done with randomized data (1000 times). I am doing manually for 10000 times but taking so much time, I wonder whether it is possible to perform the analysis with creating a loop for many replicated datasets?

Hi, May be you can try this: obj_name<- load("arun.RData") Pred1<- get(obj_name[1]) Actual1<- get(obj_name[2]) library(reshape2) dat<-cbind(melt(Pred1,id.vars="S1"),value2=melt(Actual1,id.vars="S1")[,3])? # to reshape to long form colnames(dat)[3:4]<- c("Predict","Actual") dat$variable<- as.character(dat$variable) #not that

Hi Everyone, After some more thoughts to the Jacob's suggestion of using multiclasses for Opcode mapping, this is what I have come up with. Please take a look at the design below and let me know if you have any suggestions/questions. I have tried to keep the design target independent so that other targets could benefit from it. 1) The idea is to add 3 new classes into

You are welcome. I changed the pattern, the same old error pop up again, crash in the same place. Type set is empty for each HW mode: possible type contradiction in the pattern below (use -print-records with llvm-tblgen to see all expanded records). vtInt: &nbsp; (vt:{ *:[Other] }) UNREACHABLE executed at /home/nancy/work/rpp_clang/llvm/utils/TableGen/CodeGenDAGPatterns.cpp:824!

Dear R-helpers, Happy New Year to all the helpful members of the list. Here is the behavior I'm looking for: > v1 <- c("a","b","c") > n1 <- c(0, 1, 2) > v2 <- c("c", "a", "b") > n2 <- c(0, 1 , 2) > (f1 <- data.frame(v1, n1)) v1 n1 1 a 0 2 b 1 3 c 2 > (f2 <- data.frame(v2, n2))

def STOREbos { // InstructionEncoding Instruction RPPInst RPPInstMMEMrr &nbsp; field bits<32&gt; Inst = { 0, 0, 0, 1, rs1{2}, rs1{1}, rs1{0}, index{0}, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, rbase{3}, rbase{2}, rbase{1}, rbase{0}, rbase{4}, roffset{4}, roffset{3}, roffset{2}, roffset{1}, roffset{0}, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; &nbsp; field bits<32&gt; SoftFail = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,

Hi maybe there is another more elegant solution but something like this > idx <- 1:nrow(dat1) > lll <- split(idx, dat1$group) > dat1[unlist(lapply(lll, sample, rep=TRUE)),] gives you selected rows. You could use for cycle or save those data frames manually Cheers Petr > -----Original Message----- > From: R-help [mailto:r-help-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Marna

Hello all, I am at the adding Instruction Set stage of adding new target support into LLVM. There is a single instruction op mnemonic with multiple operand forms. For example: Add R1, R2 & Add @R1, R2. I found that there is similar case in x86 instruction set, such like ADD reg, reg & ADD mem, reg. However, the solution of x86 is adding suffix of instruction and translating instruction op

Hi Krzysztof, Today I try it on llvm9.0.0 version. &nbsp; def bos : RPPInstMMEMrr<OPC_STORE, &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (outs), (ins MGPR:$rs1, SGPR32:$rbase, MGPR:$roffset, uimm2:$rshift), &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; !strconcat(opcodestr, ""), "$rs1,

Building on Petr's suggestion, you could modify his code to get all 10 samples at once in a compact format: > Samples <- lapply(lll, function(x) replicate(10, sample(x, rep=TRUE))) # Samples is a list containing 3 matrices, one for each group # Each column gives the index (row) numbers for a particular sample > str(Samples) List of 3 $ A: int [1:3, 1:10] 2 1 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 2 ... $

I have this same problem in our backend. I solve it by adding a pseudo instruction at instruction selection that transforms @R1 into R1, so only a single pattern is required. I then can propogate the pseudo instruction after instruction selection. Micah From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Lu Mitnick Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 10:29 AM

Hello Villmow, Is it your backend EFI Byte Code Virtual Machine?? Would you mind to give me an example about what pseudo instruction you add?? thanks a lot yi-hong 2011/1/19 Villmow, Micah <Micah.Villmow at amd.com> > I have this same problem in our backend. I solve it by adding a pseudo > instruction at instruction selection that transforms @R1 into R1, so only a > single

I am using some non-allocatable RegisterClasses to define lists of registers that are used for various non-allocation-related processing in the back end. For example, we have a post-allocation functional unit selection pass that is guided by the register assignment, which does things like 'myRegClass.contains(Reg)' to see if a register is in the set of registers accessible by a given unit.

Hi, The full trace stack: Type set is empty for each HW mode: possible type contradiction in the pattern below (use -print-records with llvm-tblgen to see all expanded records). vtInt: (vt:{ *:[Other] }) UNREACHABLE executed at /home/nancy/work/rpp_clang/llvm/utils/TableGen/CodeGenDAGPatterns.cpp:824! [ 85%] Building X86GenEVEX2VEXTables.inc... &nbsp;#0 0x000000000081b9b5