search for: condtioned

Hello, I am trying to pass a conditional expression into an expression to be evaluated when ever an R statement is called. For example: get_unique_count <- function(df, select, field){ uniqs <- unique(subset(df, select)[field]) return (nrow(uniqs)) } In this case select is a conditional statement year == 1980, and the function would be called in the following manner:

Hi again, I am looking for some way to alternately use 2 related functions, based on some ifelse() condition. For example, I have 2 functions mclapply() and lapply() However, mclapply() function has one extra parameter 'mc.cores' which lapply doesnt not have. I know when mc.cores = 1, these 2 functions are essentially same, however I am looking for more general way to control them

On 04/03/2018 10:39 AM, Christofer Bogaso wrote: > Hi again, > > I am looking for some way to alternately use 2 related functions, > based on some ifelse() condition. > > For example, I have 2 functions mclapply() and lapply() > > However, mclapply() function has one extra parameter 'mc.cores' which > lapply doesnt not have. > > I know when mc.cores =

Hi, In a normal PBX environment a user usually calls in and IVR's are played according to a predefined dialplan. Iam trying to develop an application where asterisk dials out to a user and initiates an IVR instead (please note that the IVR is not static and may vary according to different condtions). Can someone guide me how this is possible using Asterisk. Do I need to write some sort of

Hi Christofer, You cannot assign to list(...). You can do the following myList <- list(...)[!names(list(...)) %in% 'mc.cores'] HTH, Eric On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Christofer Bogaso < bogaso.christofer at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > As an example, I want to create below kind of custom Function which > either be mclapply pr lapply > > Lapply_me =

What''s the best way to handle a find that doesn''t find anything? For example. Model Foo @result = Foo.find(:first, :condition => "some condtion string").name if the condition is not met Foo.find stops the application with ''unexpected nil''. What is the best way to gracefully trap this error and return something meaningfull to the calling

Hello All, I want to dertermine whether a basicblock is in a conditional branch. such as, //============================= if a > 2 // BasicBlock A then BasicBlock B endif BasicBlock C //============================= What I want to identify is BasicBlock B, which is in a condtional block. but C is not. In other words, I want to distinguish BasicBlocks that * must * be executed and that

Hi, As an example, I want to create below kind of custom Function which either be mclapply pr lapply Lapply_me = function(X = X, FUN = FUN, ..., Apply_MC = FALSE) { if (Apply_MC) { return(mclapply(X, FUN, ...)) } else { if (any(names(list(...)) == 'mc.cores')) { list(...) = list(...)[!names(list(...)) %in% 'mc.cores'] } return(lapply(X, FUN, ...)) } } However when Apply_MC =

Hi Christofer, Before you made the change that I suggested, your program was stopping at the statement: list(...) = list(..) .etc This means that it never tried to execute the statement: return(lapply(X,FUN,...)) Now that you have made the change, it gets past the first statement and tries to execute the statement: return(lapply(X,FUN,...)). That attempt is generating the error message because

2012/8/25 Iaroslav Markov <ymarkov at cs.stonybrook.edu>: > Can't you do it by performing some analysis on CFG? You can traverse that structure with BFS. And after that for all the BB you have visited more than once, you try to find a parent that has a branch instruction as a terminator. Additionally you ensure that there are no BB with branches as terminators on your way. If such

That's fine. The issue is how you called Lapply_me(). What did you pass as the argument to FUN? And if you did not pass anything that how is FUN declared? You have not shown that in your email. On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 7:11 PM, Christofer Bogaso < bogaso.christofer at gmail.com> wrote: > My modified function looks below : > > Lapply_me = function(X = X, FUN = FUN, Apply_MC =

@Eric - with this approach I am getting below error : Error in FUN(X[[i]], ...) : unused argument (list()) On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Eric Berger <ericjberger at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Christofer, > You cannot assign to list(...). You can do the following > > myList <- list(...)[!names(list(...)) %in% 'mc.cores'] > > HTH, > Eric > > On Sun, Mar

I'm trying to do realize the following: I have 4 condtions. If all conditions are satisfied I will paste("PASS") If any of these is not satisfied I will paste("FAIL"). But I have to paste the corresponding failure. ifelse is a good solution but for a 2 conditions. Maybe switch or something like this. Does anyone have an idea how to do? Thanks in advance. Adel -- View

Hi, Seems pass scalar-evolution+indvars fail to get the loop trip count of the following case: int foo(int x, int y, int lam[256], int alp[256]) { int i; int z = y; for (i = 255; i >= 0; i--) { z += x; lam[i] = alp[i]; } return z; } The final optimized ll code is : define i32 @foo(i32 %x, i32 %y, i32* %lam, i32* %alp) nounwind { entry: br label %bb bb:

My modified function looks below : Lapply_me = function(X = X, FUN = FUN, Apply_MC = FALSE, ...) { if (Apply_MC) { return(mclapply(X, FUN, ...)) } else { if (any(names(list(...)) == 'mc.cores')) { myList = list(...)[!names(list(...)) %in% 'mc.cores'] } return(lapply(X, FUN, myList)) } } Here, I am not passing ... anymore rather passing myList On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 10:37 PM,

Dear Listers: I have a couple of data frames to report and each corresponds to different condtions, e.g. conditions=c(10, 15, 20, 25). In this examples, four data frames need to be exported in a "pretty" report. I knew Perl has some module for exporting data to Excel and after googling, I found R does not. So I am wondering if there is a package in R for generating good reports. I

Can't you do it by performing some analysis on CFG? You can traverse that structure with BFS. And after that for all the BB you have visited more than once, you try to find a parent that has a branch instruction as a terminator. Additionally you ensure that there are no BB with branches as terminators on your way. If such parent exist, you mark that there is exist a direct connection between

Ok so I''m trying to make a little exchange 3 for 1 of 1 higher rank here is the code in the controller: def exch_link @id = @session[:user].id @type = @params[:type] exch(@id,@type) end def exch(user_id,this_type) @user = User.find(:condtions => "id = " + user_id) @ranks =

Hi R-users I have two conditions. For each condition, 100 sets of 10 random numbers from N(0,1) need to be generated. Here is my question. At the begining I specify a seed number. I want to make the 100th set of the first condition and 1st set of the second conditon the same. What do I need to do ? After generating 99th set of 10 random numbers and then saving .Random.seed then using

> > > Having the final .ll file doesn't help debug this. If you run opt > -analyze -scalar-evolution on the .ll you pasted, it will correctly > print out the loop trip count. > > I've modified llvm-gcc to remove all the passes after indvars. > > I updated my llvm and now it works. >> > Surely the loop trip count is 256, but the Loop::getTripCount()