similar to: sum() vs cumsum() implicit type coercion

>>>>> Tomas Kalibera >>>>> on Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:29:05 +0200 writes: > On 8/23/20 5:02 PM, Rory Winston wrote: >> Hi >> >> I noticed a small inconsistency when using sum() vs cumsum() >> >> I have a char-based series >> >> > tryjpy$long >> >> [1]

On 8/23/20 5:02 PM, Rory Winston wrote: > Hi > > I noticed a small inconsistency when using sum() vs cumsum() > > I have a char-based series > > > tryjpy$long > > [1] "0.0022" "-0.0002" "-0.0149" "-0.0023" "-0.0342" "-0.0245" "-0.0022" > > [8] "0.0003" "-0.0001"

LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When

On 23.11.2012, at 15:12, john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2012, at 5:46 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> Adding LLVMdev, since this is intimately related to the optimization passes. >> >>> I think this is roughly because some function level optimisations are >>> worse than O(N) in the number of instructions. >>

Dear R-tisans, I am trying to calculate the 12th root of a transition (square) matrix, but can't seem to obtain an accurate result. I realize that this post is laced with intimations of quantitative finance, but the question is both R-related and broadly mathematical. That said, I'm happy to post this to R-SIG-Finance if I've erred in posting this to the general list. I've

Are these 225 compile time regressions real? It sure looks bad! Ciao, Duncan. On 01/12/11 09:39, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/380/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time > Current 380

Using the small reproducible example below, I'd like to know if one can somehow use the matrix "sig" (defined below) to add a black outline (with lwd=2) to all pixels with a corresponding value of 1 in the matrix 'sig'? So for example, in the ggplot2 plot below, the pixel located at [1,3] would be outlined by a black square since the value at sig[1,3] == 1. This is my first

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

Andy and I briefly discussed this the other day, we have not yet got chance to list a detailed pass order for the pre- and post- IPO scalar optimizations. This is wish-list in our mind: pre-IPO: based on the ordering he propose, get rid of the inlining (or just inline tiny func), get rid of all loop xforms... post-IPO: get rid of inlining, or maybe we still need it, only

Hello , I am compiling SPEC 2000 benchmarks with llvm .Got stuck with calculating "execution time" of all the .bc and native files. The log for nightly test itself gives execution times but I am passing the bytecode files to my pass which gives another bytecode file.I have to calculate execution time of such bytecode and native files as well.If i simply do this: time lli

Dear all R-users, I wanted to fit a Garch(1,1) model to a dataset by: >garch1 = garch(na.omit(dat)) But I got a warning message while executing, which is: >Warning message: >NaNs produced in: sqrt(pred$e) The garch parameters that I got are: > garch1 Call: garch(x = na.omit(dat)) Coefficient(s): a0 a1 b1 1.212e-04 1.001e+00 1.111e-14 Can any one

With the case-insensitive file system patch from http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9656#c15 applied to dragonegg 2.9, the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks are seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10 under gcc 4.5.3svn using the dragonegg plugin... ================================================================================ Date & Time : 8 Apr 2011 19:52:56 Test Name :

Target: FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 on amd64. autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: x86_64-unknown-freebsd7.0 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Target: amd64-undermydesk-freebsd Configured with: FreeBSD/amd64 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD] [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release

Hi all, I've started looking at the GlobalMerge pass, enabled by default on ARM and AArch64. I think we should reconsider that, at least for AArch64. As is, the pass just merges all globals together, in groups of 4KB (AArch64, 128B on ARM). At the time it was enabled, the general thinking was "it's almost free, it doesn't affect performance much, we might as well use it".

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I am compiling SPEC 2000 benchmarks with llvm .Got stuck with > calculating "execution time" of all the .bc and native files. > > The log for nightly test itself gives execution times but I am passing > the bytecode files to my pass which gives another bytecode file.I have > to calculate execution time of such bytecode and

Hello All, Thanks for the reply.I can generate the reports by compiling Spec through llvm, but that couldn't resolve my problem. I m trying to determine execution time for the bytecode and native files , which are obtained as a result of running my pass over the original bytecode .I am running these experiments on spec benchmark. In SPEC we have command line tools such as runspec where

If I have a table (we'll call it, "test") containing two columns (as below): i x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 y 0 1.125 0.232 7.160 0.0859 8.905 1.5563 7 0.920 0.268 8.804 0.0865 7.388 0.8976 15 0.835 0.271 8.108 0.0852 5.348 0.7482 22 1.000 0.237 6.370 0.0838 8.056 0.7160 29 1.150 0.192 6.441 0.0821 6.960 0.3130 37 0.990 0.202 5.154 0.0792 5.690 0.3617 44 0.840 0.184 5.896 0.0812 6.932 0.1139 58

Dear R user: I am studying the allele data of two populations. the following is the data: a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7 a8 a9 a10 a11 a12 a13 a14 a15 a16 a17 pop1 0.0217 0.0000 0.0109 0.0435 0.0435 0.0000 0.0109 0.0543 0.1739 0.0761 0.1413 0.1522 0.1087 0.0870 0.0435 0.0217 0.0109 pop2 0.0213 0.0213 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0426 0.1702 0.2128 0.1596 0.1809 0.0957 0.0745 0.0106

Dear all, I'm using R 2.8.1 under Windows Vista on a dual core 2,4 GhZ with 4 GB of RAM. I'm trying to reproduce a result out of "Analysis of Financial Time Series" by Ruey Tsay. In R I'm using the fGarch library. After fitting a ar(3)-garch(1,1)-model > model<-garchFit(~arma(3,0)+garch(1,1), analyse) I'm saving the results via > result<-model

Hi, R-users, data is a matrix like this AMR BS GE HR MO UK SP500 1974 -0.3505 -0.1154 -0.4246 -0.2107 -0.0758 0.2331 -0.2647 1975 0.7083 0.2472 0.3719 0.2227 0.0213 0.3569 0.3720 1976 0.7329 0.3665 0.2550 0.5815 0.1276 0.0781 0.2384 1977 -0.2034 -0.4271 -0.0490 -0.0938 0.0712 -0.2721 -0.0718 1978 0.1663 -0.0452 -0.0573 0.2751 0.1372 -0.1346