search for: code2

...atement with the xtable function(library xtable). I'm trying to get the printing of the elements of two lists in a sorted way. These two list have in common the their names. I will try to give an example: the first list looks like this: $code1 Code code1 Nation Usa $code2 Code code2 Nation Spain the second one is like this $code 1 var1 87 var2 73 $code2 var1 34 var2 23 As you can see the two list have the same names.I tried to implement the following ifelse...

Dear all, I have a dataset as below: id code1 code2 p 1 4 8 0.1 1 5 7 0.9 2 1 8 0.4 2 6 2 0.2 2 4 3 0.6 3 5 6 0.7 3 7 5 0.9 I just want to rewrite it as this (vertica...

...ry code and NA is the code for Namibia. When I read the data file using read.csv, NA for Namibia is being treated as null or "NA" How can I prevent this from happening? I tried the following but it didn't work input <- read.csv("padded.csv",header = TRUE,as.is = c("code2")) thanks, Suresh [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...assneeds information from a FunctionPass, e.g., the post-dominance frontier (PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority of its work in the doFinalization() method. When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no complaints. However, if I then try run "opt -simplifycfg -verify -o code3.bc code2.bc," I get the assertion failure below. If thought that the verify option should have made sure that bytecode written to code2.bc was correct. Am I incorrect? opt: Reader....

Hello! I am wondering if it's possible to run - in sequence - code that is stored in several R scripts. For example: Script in the file "code1.r" contains the code: a = 3; b = 5; c = a + b Script in the file "code2.r" contains the code: d = 10; e = d - c Script in the file "code3.r" contains the code: result=e/a I understand that I could write those 3 scripts as 3 functions and source them from another script. But maybe there is a way of having them run one by one as such? Thanks a lot! --...

...post-dominance frontier >> (PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a >> FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority >> of its work in the doFinalization() method. > > ok > >> When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no >> complaints. However, if I then try run "opt -simplifycfg -verify -o >> code3.bc code2.bc," I get the assertion failure below. If thought that >> the verify option should have made sure that bytecode written to >> code2.bc was correct...

...1318997163, NA, 1318997842, NA, 1319000172, 1319001123), class = c("POSIXct", "POSIXt"), tzone = ""), Code.end = structure(c(1318996828, 1318997168, NA, 1318997884, NA, 1319000229, 1319001142), class = c("POSIXct", "POSIXt"), tzone = ""), Code2.begin = structure(c(1318996823, 1318997163, NA, 1318997842, 1318997962, NA, 1319001123), class = c("POSIXct", "POSIXt"), tzone = ""), Code2.end = structure(c(1318996828, 1318997168, NA, 1318997884, 1318998120, NA, 1319001142), class = c("POSIXct", "POSIX...

...red") p ########################################################### ########################################################### # This one does not work # Create a test data set set.seed(100) my.data=data.frame(code1=rep(c("A","B","C"),each=30), code2=rep(rep(c("D","E","F"),each=10),3), n=runif(90)) # Create a data frame with the mean value, to add to each facet mean.data=tapply(my.data$n,INDEX=list(my.data$code1,my.data$code2),mean) mean.data=melt(mean.data) colnames(mean.data)=c("code1&quot...

...gt;>(PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a >>>FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority >>>of its work in the doFinalization() method. >> >>ok >> >> >>>When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no >>>complaints. However, if I then try run "opt -simplifycfg -verify -o >>>code3.bc code2.bc," I get the assertion failure below. If thought that >>>the verify option should have made sure that bytecode written to >>>code2.bc...

...from a FunctionPass, e.g., the post-dominance frontier > (PDF), and because a ModulePass is not permitted to require a > FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority > of its work in the doFinalization() method. ok > When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no > complaints. However, if I then try run "opt -simplifycfg -verify -o > code3.bc code2.bc," I get the assertion failure below. If thought that > the verify option should have made sure that bytecode written to > code2.bc was correct. Am I incorrec...

...the code, but I could not find a way to get the names of the objects in addition to their contents. Any suggestion will be welcome Sebastien rm(list=ls(all=T)) code1 <- paste('l <- list(a=1,b=2,c=3)', 'm <- matrix(1:15,nrow=3)', sep='\n') code2 <- 'g <- rnorm(100,10,2)' myf <- function(code=NULL){ start <- ls(all=T) eval(parse(text=code)) end <- ls(all=T) end <- end[-which(end=='start')] return(lapply(end[!end%in% start],function(x) eval(parse(text=x)))) } myf(code1) myf(code2) [[alterna...

...ier versions, but it used to be different in 2.4): install.packages("inline") library(inline) sig <- signature(x="character") code1 <- " for (int i = 0; i < LENGTH(x); i++ ) Rprintf(\"%s\\n\", CHAR(STRING_ELT(x, i))); return R_NilValue; " code2 <- " for (int i = 0; i < LENGTH(x); i++ ) Rprintf(\"%s\\n\", CHAR(asChar(STRING_ELT(x, i)))); return R_NilValue; " setCMethod(c("p1","p2"), list(sig,sig), list(code1,code2)) #---------------------------------------------------------- p1(c(&qu...

...not permitted to require a >>>>FunctionPass, I am forced to make my pass a FunctionPass and do majority >>>>of its work in the doFinalization() method. >>> >>>ok >>> >>> >>> >>>>When I run "opt -mypass -verify -o code2.bc code1.bc" I get no >>>>complaints. However, if I then try run "opt -simplifycfg -verify -o >>>>code3.bc code2.bc," I get the assertion failure below. If thought that >>>>the verify option should have made sure that bytecode written to >>...

...I can't get it to work. This is my example and attempt: sim.code<-c("1.1234.1a.1","1.1234.1a.2","1.3245.2c.5","4.6743.3c.","4.3254.6b.4","3.5463.2a.") sim.val<-c(4,5,3,6,4,7) sim.df<-data.frame(sim.code,sim.val) sim.df$sim.code2<-sub(".$",".1",sim.df$sim.code) sim.df but this changes all the ends to ".1" Thanks, Chris -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Substitute-value-tp4660699.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Greetings. I'm having some trouble constructing a contingency table from raw data (actually read in via RPgSQL). Here's the deal: - What I've got: a data frame in the form: Groupcode code1 code2 code3 code4 code5 .. coden where groupcode is one of {P,C,B,S,U,X} and code{1..n} is TRUE or FALSE. code{1..n} are NOT mutually exclusive, so between 0 and n of them can be TRUE. - What I need: a contingency table in the form: Groupcode code1 code2 .. coden P C B S...

...uthfd.c Sun Oct 8 17:45:28 2000 --- authfd.c.orig Tue Aug 22 20:46:24 2000 *************** *** 223,229 **** /* Get message type, and verify that we got a proper answer. */ type = buffer_get_char(&auth->identities); ! if (agent_failed(type)) { return NULL; } else if (type != code2) { fatal("Bad authentication reply message type: %d", type); --- 223,229 ---- /* Get message type, and verify that we got a proper answer. */ type = buffer_get_char(&auth->identities); ! if (type == SSH_AGENT_FAILURE) { return NULL; } else if (type != code2) {...

...} }; } char HSASupportedRuntimeEval::ID = 0; static RegisterPass<RuntimeEval> X("Eval", "Runtime Evaluation"); it can be compiled successful, but when i run it with command: './Release+Asserts/bin/opt -load ./Release+Asserts/lib/LLVMRuntimeEval.so -Eval < code2.bc', i meet an error: Pass 'HSA Supported Runtime Evaluation' is not initialized. Verify if there is a pass dependency cycle. Required Passes: opt: /home/ccwang/software/LLVM/LLVM3.2/llvm-3.2.src/lib/VMCore/PassManager.cpp:616: void llvm::PMTopLevelManager::schedulePass(llvm::Pass...

...uence of the following code blocks. If successful first runs code block1 and then block2, otherwise the opposite. code1: debug2: channel 0: rcvd eof debug2: channel 0: output open -> drain debug2: channel 0: obuf empty debug2: channel 0: close_write debug2: channel 0: output drain -> closed code2: debug1: client_input_channel_req: channel 0 rtype exit-status reply 0 debug1: client_input_channel_req: channel 0 rtype eow at openssh.com reply 0 debug2: channel 0: rcvd eow debug2: channel 0: close_read debug2: channel 0: input open -> closed Any help appreciated.. thanks

...your<br>> changes. I would put together an example with this directive structure:<br>> <br>> #pragma omp target teams distribute<br>> for(...){<br>> <code1><br>> #pragma omp parallel for<br>> for(...) {<br>> <code2><br>> }<br>> <code3><br>> }<br>> <br>> which forces the use of the master-worker scheme (non-SPMD mode) without any<br>> other distractions.<br><br>The atomic stuff I used to determine correctness. I haven't yet look...

Where we are ------------ Currently, when we generate OpenMP target offloading code for GPUs, we use sufficient syntactic criteria to decide between two execution modes: 1) SPMD -- All target threads (in an OpenMP team) run all the code. 2) "Guarded" -- The master thread (of an OpenMP team) runs the user code. If an OpenMP distribute region is encountered,