search for: bazs

Hi all, I expect I'm getting something wrong, but cat("foo bar baz foo bar baz foo bar baz", fill = 10) should be broken into lines of width 10, whereas I get: > cat("foo bar baz foo bar baz foo bar baz", fill = 10) foo bar baz foo bar baz foo bar baz This is on R 3.4.3, but I don't see mentions of it fixed in 3.4.4 or r-devel NEWS. Cheers, David

[Was initially posted on cfe-users, sorry.] Hi, I'm sorry my message is quite long, the TL;DR version is "g++ and clang++ seem to have different opinions on how RTTI, templates, and ELF visibility should interact". I can't tell whether this is a bug or not: I have found no relevant documentation that could help me decide whether this behavior is meant, or not. All I can say

How can I do this?: foo { name: $bar => "frob" } define foo( $bar = false, $baz = false ) { if #$bar and $baz both defined $cmd = "frobnicate --bar=$bar --baz=$baz ${name}" else if #$bar defined $cmd = "frobnicate --bar=$bar ${name}" else if #$baz defined $cmd = "frobnicate --baz=$baz ${name}" else

Hi, I have a situation where I want to delete some of my excluded patterns but still want to preserve some other. For example consider below source and destination directory hierarchy. Source Dest ---------- --------- /foo/bar/ /foo/bar/ | -> baz | -> baz | -> xyz | -> xyz | ->

Howdy, [Please preserve the CC to 424919-forwarded at bugs.debian.org on any replies.] The following bug in Markdown was reported to the Debian bug tracking system. In short, running both the released version of Markdown and the latest beta on * foo > bar > baz produces invalid HTML. ----- Forwarded message from Joey Hess <joeyh at debian.org> ----- From: Joey Hess <joeyh

Suppose I have a string of objects names: name <- c("foo", "bar", "baz") and I would like to use a for loop to automatically create three objects called "foo", "bar" and "baz" accordingly. Then how can this be done" (so that in the workspace, foo = 1, bar = 2 and baz=3) for (i in name) { ..... } Thanks! Mark

In the mandriva rpm of rsync, we apply for our rpm the acl patch in the patches directory. I am trying to update our rpm to rsync 2.6.6 but one of the test failed with this patch. It seems to be a minor problem, but can you have a look ? Thanks by advance. Following the message (a bit long): ----- itemize log follows Testing for symlinks using 'test -h' +

Hi John, there?s a bug in Markdown.pl: [foo*bar](#) [baz*quux](#) This expands to the following: <p><a href="#">foo<em>bar</a> <a href="#">baz</em>quux</a></p> Those `*` should either be disregarded or the tags should nest correctly: 1. <p><a href="#">foo*bar</a> <a

14:50 < cbosdonnat> pino|work, do you know how I could get ?tar passed from one function to the other in the checksum code? 14:51 < pino|work> cbosdonnat: pass it as it is, ie ?foo 14:52 < cbosdonnat> pino|work, indeed, works better... I didn't know I could use the ? in the calling function and I used the ~ instead 14:53 < pino|work> ? is handled like an option type

Hi, I find it would be very convenient to nest resources in two levels, so a member is only sensible as a part of a club, and a fee pament is only sensible in the context of a club and a member. Is it possible to nest nested resources? How would the syntax be? I have tried just nesting the assignment in routes.rb, but failed to get it right What do ou think? Is it possible? /Fredrik --

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:31 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-8687 ] Block''s return value is dropped on stubbed yielding methods. To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #8687, was opened at 2007-02-15 17:29 You can respond by visiting:

Dear Prof. John Fox, ? Sat, 21 Sep 2024 12:47:49 -0400 John Fox <jfox at mcmaster.ca> ?????: > NextMethod(formula(object), data=eval(object$call$data), > contrasts.arg=object$contrasts) The use of NextMethod worries me a bit. It will work as intended as long as everyone gives fully-named arguments to the generic, without relying on positional or partial

Hi, I read below lines in rsync v3.0.5 for --relative option. if you used this command: rsync -av /foo/bar/baz.c remote:/tmp/ ... this would create a file named baz.c in /tmp/ on the remote machine. If instead you used rsync -avR /foo/bar/baz.c remote:/tmp/ then a file named /tmp/foo/bar/baz.c would be created on the remote machine, preserving its full path It is also possible to limit the

Is there a cheat-sheet anywhere that describes how to do SQL-like manipulations on a data frame? My knowledge of R is rather limited. But from my experience it seems as though one can think of data frames as being similar to tables in a database: there are rows, columns, and values. Also, one can perform similar manipulations on a data frame as one can on a table. For example:

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5297 Summary: merge test fails Product: rsync Version: 3.0.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: SunOS Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us QAContact:

Hi, I know S manuals used to warn against using the same names for a variable and a function, but I have never seen that cause problems in R, so I usually don't pay much attention to it. Which is why the following behaviour came as a surprise: > bar <- function() 1 > foo <- function(bar = bar()) { + bar + } > foo(9) [1] 9 > foo() Error in foo() : recursive default

Is it possible for a pass to get access to the command line options passed to it? That is, if I use the CommandLine library to define cl::opt<int> Foo("foo", ...); cl::opt<int> Bar("bar", ...); cl::opt<bool> Baz("baz", ...); and the user runs "opt -load mypass.so -foo=123 -std-compile-opts -baz", can I somehow get a string

I'm using: % ssh -V SSH Version OpenSSH-1.2.3, protocol version 1.5. Compiled with SSL. % uname -a Linux gellar 2.2.13 #1 SMP Wed Dec 29 14:07:41 PST 1999 i686 unknown and am wondering whether it's a fundamental shortcoming of the SSH protocol that argument splitting is not preserved from client to server, but instead the argument list is re-split on whitespace. E.g., from my machine

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:53 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > I think you're jumping ahead a bit here. I'm not sure the semantics are > anywhere near as weird as you're framing them to be. :) I now think this weirdness actually does not have to do anything with guard_on or bail_to_interpeter, but it has to do with deopt bundles itself. Our

Hi Kev, I'm glad to hear llvm-objdump is getting attention. I'm unclear on how much output specialization one could (or should) do for ELF vs. Mach-O. If you're game, let's compare an example: $ cat labeltest.s .text foo: nop bar: bum: nop jmp bar jmp bum jmp baz nop baz: nop Assembling for x86 and llvm-objdump'ing, i get $ llvm-mc