Editing User:LYH

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 69: Line 69:
== O: Only out of interest ==
== O: Only out of interest ==
* '''Did you ever hear about Octave before?'''
* '''Did you ever hear about Octave before?'''
:Yes I did.
** '''If so, when and where? How far have you been involved already?'''
** '''If so, when and where? How far have you been involved already?'''
::I noticed Octave when I used proprietary Matlab in my school last year.
::Yes, I noticed Octave when I used proprietary Matlab in my school last year.


** '''What was the first question concerning Octave you could not find an answer to rather quickly?'''
** '''What was the first question concerning Octave you could not find an answer to rather quickly?'''
Line 79: Line 78:
* '''Please state the operating system you work with.'''
* '''Please state the operating system you work with.'''
** '''If you have access to more than one, please state them and the conditions under which you are granted this access.'''
** '''If you have access to more than one, please state them and the conditions under which you are granted this access.'''
::Usually Linux. But sometimes I work with Mac OSX and Windows if I need to test a program on variant platforms.
::Usually Linux. But I could work with Mac OSX and Windows if I need to test on variant platform.


* '''Please estimate an average time per day you will be able to ''(if separated)'' access'''
* '''Please estimate an average time per day you will be able to ''(if separated)'' access'''
Line 97: Line 96:


* '''How autonomous are you when developing?'''
* '''How autonomous are you when developing?'''
:Give me a project direction. I could find what I need from Google, Stack Overflow, IRC and mailing list. If information is not available on web or book, I would rely on my background knowledge to analyze problem and further solve it. 
:* '''Do you like to discuss changes intensively and not start coding until you know what you want to do?'''
:* '''Do you like to discuss changes intensively and not start coding until you know what you want to do?'''
:* '''Do you like to code a proof of concept to 'see how it turns out', modifying that and taking the risk of having work thrown away if it doesn't match what the project or original proponent had in mind?'''
:* '''Do you like to code a proof of concept to 'see how it turns out', modifying that and taking the risk of having work thrown away if it doesn't match what the project or original proponent had in mind?'''
Line 104: Line 102:
== Y: Your task ==
== Y: Your task ==
* '''Did you select a task from our list of proposals and ideas?'''
* '''Did you select a task from our list of proposals and ideas?'''
:Yes I did.


:* '''If yes, what task did you choose? Please describe what part of it you especially want to focus on if you can already provide this information.'''
:* '''If yes, what task did you choose? Please describe what part of it you especially want to focus on if you can already provide this information.'''
     http://wiki.octave.org/Summer_of_Code_Project_Ideas#Improve_JIT_compiling
     http://wiki.octave.org/Summer_of_Code_Project_Ideas#Improve_JIT_compiling
::I selected “Improveing JIT compiling” project, focusing on “Enhance JITC functionality” and “Migrate from LLVM JIT to LLVM MCJIT”. Current JITC lacks some feature: Functions and exponents (e.g. 2^z) cannot compile with the JITC. I want to concentrate on expanding JITC to handle this non-trivial but fundamental case.  
::I choose “Improveing JIT compiling” project, focusing on “Enhance JITC functionality” and “Migrate from LLVM JIT to LLVM MCJIT”. Current JITC lacks some feature: Functions and exponents (e.g. 2^z) cannot compile with the JITC. I want to concentrate on expanding JITC to handle this non-trivial but fundamental case.  
::Second, I would begin to migrate from JIT to MCJIT. JITC use JIT now, however LLVM community has no longer maintained JIT and move to MCJIT. I think we could move to MCJIT as well (but still support JIT). This is really important if we want to get the benefit from LLVM subsequently.
::Second, I would begin to migrate from JIT to MCJIT. JITC use JIT now, however LLVM community has no longer maintained JIT and move to MCJIT. I think we could move to MCJIT as well (but still support JIT). This is really important if we want to get the benefit from LLVM subsequently.
::When all essential case is added, I would try to implement some JIT related optimization into JITC (like trace/method-based JIT).
::When all essential case is added, I would try to implement some JIT related optimization into JITC (like trace/method-based JIT).
Line 146: Line 143:
::Implement JIT related optimizations into JITC
::Implement JIT related optimizations into JITC


[[Category:2013]]
[[Category:Summer of Code 2013 Applicants]]
[[Category:Applicants]]
Please note that all contributions to Octave may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Octave:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To edit this page, please answer the question that appears below (more info):

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)