search for: adjud

Someone needs to adjudicate on whether I add the #include of <cstdio> or not. I can't test this so, Paolo/Henrik/Jeff, please let me know if I need to add it. Thanks, Reid. On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 07:08, Jeff Cohen wrote: > But I compiled that under vc7.1 as it was! > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:19:22 +...

....1 and without > STLPort, then there really isn't a choice. I have to research the issue > myself to see if it's possible to avoid using STLPort. > > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:42:51 -0700 > Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > > > Someone needs to adjudicate on whether I add the #include of <cstdio> or > > not. I can't test this so, Paolo/Henrik/Jeff, please let me know if I > > need to add it. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Reid. > > > > On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 07:08, Jeff Cohen wrote: > >...

.... If it is impossible to build with VC7.1 and without STLPort, then there really isn't a choice. I have to research the issue myself to see if it's possible to avoid using STLPort. On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:42:51 -0700 Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > Someone needs to adjudicate on whether I add the #include of <cstdio> or > not. I can't test this so, Paolo/Henrik/Jeff, please let me know if I > need to add it. > > Thanks, > > Reid. > > On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 07:08, Jeff Cohen wrote: > > But I compiled that under vc7.1 as it w...

I have a situation where the parameter estimates from lrm identify a binary predictor variable ("X") as clearly non-significant (p>0.3), but the ANOVA of that same model gives X a chi^2-df rank of > 200, and adjudicates X and one interaction of X and a continuous measure as highly significant. The N is massive and X has two categories, each with > 100,000 observations. I would expect X to have a significant impact on the outcome. The full model includes a large number of continuous (coded with rcs...

...n there really isn't a choice. I have to research the >> issue >> myself to see if it's possible to avoid using STLPort. >> >> >> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:42:51 -0700 >> Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: >> >>> Someone needs to adjudicate on whether I add the #include of >>> <cstdio> or >>> not. I can't test this so, Paolo/Henrik/Jeff, please let me know if I >>> need to add it. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Reid. >>> >>> On Fri, 2004-09-24 at...

...directly as possible. 2. A partial reply to the (fair) criticism of those who criticize docs without offering improvements is that one may not know what improvement to offer precisely because the docs do not make it clear. This proposal or something similar addresses this issue. The experts could adjudicate. 3. I agree: writing good docs is hard. Having a mechanism like this would also help non-native English writers of software (or challenged native writers like me!) . 4. I also think John is right, that if the right mechanism were found so that small efforts could be accumulated, a lot of us...

...I/P 98 G3CWI/P Totalling 2805 Cray have 2158 G4DBL 238 M3RCV 192 G3SPJ 27 G0KPZ 16 M3CVN/P Totalling 2631 Now we won so have 1000 points Cray should have (2631/2805)*1000 = 938 points They have been given 991 points! Why! Perhaps Peter can point out my error before I raise the issue with the adjudicator. Neil, G3RIR SPONSORED LINKS Craft hobby<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Craft+hobby&w1=Craft+hobby&w2=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w3=Ham+radio&w4=De+montfort+university&c=4&s=88&.sig=bL0By1yBwB-v0XKMui6r0w> Hobby and craft supply<http://groups.y...

...Meeting will be held 2. Location is the Apple campus in Cupertino, CA 3. Duration is 1 day 4. Weekday is Friday or Monday 5. This won't be a conference, just a meeting. While we'll invite people to present, there won't be any formal paper submission, adjudication, etc. 6. Content will be focused on the attendees interests as expressed above. Please stay tuned for more details. Best Regards, Reid Spencer

...here really isn't a choice. I have to research the issue > > myself to see if it's possible to avoid using STLPort. > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:42:51 -0700 > > Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > > > > > Someone needs to adjudicate on whether I add the #include of <cstdio> or > > > not. I can't test this so, Paolo/Henrik/Jeff, please let me know if I > > > need to add it. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Reid. > > > > > > On Fri, 2004-09-...

But I compiled that under vc7.1 as it was! On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:19:22 +0200 Paolo Invernizzi <arathorn at fastwebnet.it> wrote: > Adding an include for std::remove under vc7.1 > > --- > Paolo Invernizzi >

>>>> "The documentation aims to be accurate, not necessarily clear." > I notice that none of the critics > in this thread have offered improvements on what is there. This issue is as old as documented things. With software it is particularly nasty, especially when we want the software to function across many platforms. Duncan has pointed out that critics need to step

Adding an include for std::remove under vc7.1 --- Paolo Invernizzi -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: diff.txt URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040924/e1ca1218/attachment.txt>

...gt; 2. A partial reply to the (fair) criticism of those who criticize docs > without offering improvements is that one may not know what > improvement to offer precisely because the docs do not make it clear. > This proposal or something similar addresses this issue. The experts > could adjudicate. > > 3. I agree: writing good docs is hard. Having a mechanism like this > would also help non-native English writers of software (or challenged > native writers like me!) . > > 4. I also think John is right, that if the right mechanism were found > so that small efforts c...

Paolo Invernizzi wrote: > There was a similar problem some time ago, and was resolved with alloca. > I think it's a better solution to use the stack instead of the heap... I tend to agree, but the constructors won't get called if it's an object array -- anyway, this particular case there was no objects, just pointers and bools so alloca should be fine. I'll leave it to

...ou to submit your ideas. All talks are limited to 30 minutes but could be much shorter. We plan to squeeze as many of you in as possible. The time limit helps with that. Any talks, presentations or papers will be published on a page of the LLVM web site after the meeting is over. You won't be adjudicated. If you think the mix of sessions (below) isn't right, please let us know. Session 1: Introductions - This time is reserved for in-depth introductions of everyone attending the meeting. The thing you all wanted most was to get to know one another. So, here's your chance. You have 2-3...

...reply to the (fair) criticism of those who criticize docs >> without offering improvements is that one may not know what >> improvement to offer precisely because the docs do not make it clear. >> This proposal or something similar addresses this issue. The experts >> could adjudicate. >> >> 3. I agree: writing good docs is hard. Having a mechanism like this >> would also help non-native English writers of software (or challenged >> native writers like me!) . >> >> 4. I also think John is right, that if the right mechanism were found &g...

Hi Everyone, Numerous people have been bringing up challenges with consensus driven decision making in the LLVM community. After considering this and seeing the frustrations it is causing many people, I think we should make a formal process change to help improve decision making going forward. Here is the outline of the draft proposal