Re: Initial draft of GSOC proposal - Offloading to a separate process on the same host.

Thank you Martin! I've taken your advice into account and I've uploaded my proposal. On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 1:49 PM Martin Jambor wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, Mar 27 2024, Soumya Ranjan wrote: > > Hello! > > Thanks for your response Martin! > > Sorry for the late response, I've been researching

Re: Initial draft of GSOC proposal - Offloading to a separate process on the same host.

Hello, On Wed, Mar 27 2024, Soumya Ranjan wrote: > Hello! > Thanks for your response Martin! > Sorry for the late response, I've been researching the project, going over > the source code and preparing the proposal. After a lot of thought, I've > decided to go with the "Offloading to a separate

Initial draft of GSOC proposal - Offloading to a separate process on the same host.

Hello! Thanks for your response Martin! Sorry for the late response, I've been researching the project, going over the source code and preparing the proposal. After a lot of thought, I've decided to go with the "Offloading to a separate process on the same host" project, mostly because I feel like

GSoC Proposal

Re: GSoC proposal for extending static analyzer

On Fri, 2022-04-15 at 22:36 +0530, Mir Immad wrote: > I've updated the link on the repo -- > https://mirimmad.github.io/zeta-lang. > > > You don't give many specifics in your personal decription.  One thing > > I'm not seeing is a sense of how proficient you are in various > > programming

Re: GSoC proposal for extending static analyzer

I've updated the link on the repo -- https://mirimmad.github.io/zeta-lang. > You don't give many specifics in your personal decription. One thing > I'm not seeing is a sense of how proficient you are in various > programming languages. In particular, how is your C and C++? How > familiar are

Re: GSoC proposal for extending static analyzer

On Fri, 2022-04-15 at 19:58 +0530, Mir Immad wrote: > I've submitted a proposal for extending the static analyzer to support > posix fd APIs on GSoC website. Here is the Google docs link (gdocs > < > https://docs.google.com/document/d/188zxPUsuYcF-uGVYL_G1s2RVtHhJSZeQ4sha40H7374/edit?usp=sharing >

GSoC proposal for extending static analyzer

I've submitted a proposal for extending the static analyzer to support posix fd APIs on GSoC website. Here is the Google docs link (gdocs ). Please take a look and let me know what you think. Thank

GSoC proposal - LTO incremental linking

and, of course, compiler development. I'm actually only starting to contribute to free software code now, but I have been active in other ways at local FOSS communities for a couple of years now. About the GSoC proposal, the LTO now re-processes everything from scratch, for any changes in the code, no matter

GSoC proposal - LTO incremental linking optimization

and, of course, compiler development. I'm actually only starting to contribute to free software code now, but I have been active in other ways at local FOSS communities for a couple of years now. About the GSoC proposal, the LTO now re-processes everything from scratch, for any changes in the code, no matter

My GSoC proposal for the Rust frontend

It’s about improving compiler dumps for the Rust frontend. Full proposal here:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gyAOM-f3RyZh3HVpjmIMDSuQ5gBscal71sFY6XUMcHI/edit# Yizhe

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-08 9:42 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m.,

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote:

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >>> > > > On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m.,

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: >> >> >> On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick

Re: GSOC Proposal

On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: > > >On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >>

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >>> > Well I'm talking about the shared roots of this garbage

GSOC Proposal on GENERIC level issues with threads

Richard, This is the link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BKVeh62IpigsQYf_fJqkdu_js0EeGdKtXInkWZ-DtU0/edit Seems that the function finalize_compilation_unit is a issue as it's the final function before the GIMPLE level. It seems to have lots of issues related to shared state if I'm

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >>> Well I'm talking about the shared roots of this garbage collector core state data structure or

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > >> Well I'm talking about the shared roots of this garbage collector core > >> state > >> data structure or just struct ggc_root_tab. > >> > >> But also this seems

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-01 9:47 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-01 5:56 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-01 5:56 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > >

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-04-01 5:56 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 4/1/19 1:24 AM, Eric Gallager wrote: On 3/29/19, nick wrote: Seems your right touching the complete garbage collector is too much. I'm just looking at the users of the garbage collector and it seems one of the major ones is pre compiled headers. The thing about pre-compiled headers is

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: > > > > > > On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 3/29/19, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: >> >> >> On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: >> >>

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-03-29 10:28 a.m., nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: > > Greetings All, > > I've already

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-03-29 5:08 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: Greetings All, I've already done most of the work required for signing up for GSoC

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: > >> > >> Greetings All, > >> > >> I've already done most of the work required for signing up for GSoC > >> as of last year i.e. reading getting started, being

Re: GSOC Proposal

On 2019-03-28 4:59 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: >> >> Greetings All, >> >> I've already done most of the work required for signing up for GSoC >> as of last year i.e. reading getting started, being signed up legally >> for contributions. >> >> My

Re: GSOC Proposal

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM nick wrote: > > Greetings All, > > I've already done most of the work required for signing up for GSoC > as of last year i.e. reading getting started, being signed up legally > for contributions. > > My only real concern would be the proposal which I started

GSOC Proposal

Greetings All, I've already done most of the work required for signing up for GSoC as of last year i.e. reading getting started, being signed up legally for contributions. My only real concern would be the proposal which I started writing here:

Re: GSOC proposal

Hello Ismael, On Wed, Mar 21 2018, Ismael El Houas Ghouddana wrote: > Dear Mr./Mrs, > > First of all, I really appreciate your time and attention. I am Ismael El > Houas an aerospace engineer student with knowledge of Google Cloud Platform > and I want to express my interest in working on your

GSOC proposal

Dear Mr./Mrs, First of all, I really appreciate your time and attention. I am Ismael El Houas an aerospace engineer student with knowledge of Google Cloud Platform and I want to express my interest in working on your project. Secondly, I want to ask if I am still at a time to apply to this

Re: GSoC Proposal

I have been told that the Project - Implement regular expressions in c++ mentored by Sir Benjamin De Kosnik is not completed and is available for this year GSoC project also by the the Mentor. Sorry, there still appears to be some confusion here. I am not mentoring GSOC this year. Here is

RE: GSoC proposal: Provide optimizations feedback through post-compilation messages

Quite lengthy but very interesting mail! It took me a while to formulate a proper reply :) Feedback can be scarce, but don't let that stop you from submitting a proposal. Either way, can you keep me informed about any progress? I might wish to help though that would probably be later in the

Re: GSoC proposal: Provide optimizations feedback through post-compilation messages

On Mon, 2 Apr 2012 19:57:20 + Thibault Raffaillac t...@kth.se wrote: Bump! Let me renew my interest in contributing through GSoC with post-compilation feedback (This was not an early april joke). Do you think it could lead to an acceptable GSoC proposal? (mentor interested?) Feedback

Re: GSoC proposal: Provide optimizations feedback through post-compilation messages

Bump! Let me renew my interest in contributing through GSoC with post-compilation feedback (This was not an early april joke). Do you think it could lead to an acceptable GSoC proposal? (mentor interested?) @Tomasz: On the interaction side I totally agree that communication between compiler

Re: GSoC proposal: Provide optimizations feedback through post-compilation messages

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:33:39 + Thibault Raffaillac t...@kth.se wrote: Hello all, My name is Thibault Raffaillac, CS degree student at Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, Sweden (in double-degree partnership with Ecole Centrale Marseille, France). GCC currently provides no concise

GSoC proposal: Provide optimizations feedback through post-compilation messages

Hello all, My name is Thibault Raffaillac, CS degree student at Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Stockholm, Sweden (in double-degree partnership with Ecole Centrale Marseille, France). GCC currently provides no concise way to inform the user whether it applied an expected optimization (ie, it