search for: cssp

...fit to the predicted values. QR will give better precision than normal equation methods (e.g., Cholesky) if there are substantial correlations between the columns of the model matrix. This is because sequential normal equations methods successively modify the centred sums of squares and products (CSSP) matrix to be a representation of the matrix of sums of squares and products of partial residuals as columns of the model matrix are partialed out in turn. QR directly modifies a representation of the partial residuals themselves. If columns of the model matrix are almost uncorrelated then norma...

...meric(P38_SubB$GS) # now I subtract the ground surface to calculate water depth P38_SubB.ts <- ts(data=P38_SubB, frequency = (1), start=c(1981, 1), end=c(2009,1)) # Here I convert to a time series plot(P38_SubB.ts,ylab="Mean Annual Water Depth", xlab="Year", main="CSSP Subpopulation B \n Water Depth P38") These lines work. But these do not: R3110_SubC <- read.table("A:\\Data\\Output\\Sparrow\\Hydro_Data\\R3110_Annual.txt", header=TRUE, skip=1, sep=",", stringsAsFactors=FALSE) R3110_SubC$GS <- rep(5.10, dim(R3110_SubC)[1]) R...

...hy I said unit test there... > I'd think of compiling .cpp->.o as a Clang/LLVM integration test, while > I'd think of running the debugger on the object as a system test > (because gdb is not part of what this community delivers). > I also think I'd spectacularly fail the CSSP test. :-) > >>> I try to be good about this, but as a developer I find that sort of >>> thing tedious. Which mostly proves that I suck at QA, and have to depend >>> on reviewers to keep me on the straight and narrow. This works to the >>> extent that those r...

...me way). Not sure why I said unit test there... I'd think of compiling .cpp->.o as a Clang/LLVM integration test, while I'd think of running the debugger on the object as a system test (because gdb is not part of what this community delivers). I also think I'd spectacularly fail the CSSP test. :-) >> I try to be good about this, but as a developer I find that sort of >> thing tedious. Which mostly proves that I suck at QA, and have to depend >> on reviewers to keep me on the straight and narrow. This works to the >> extent that those reviewers are willing...

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Robinson, Paul <Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com> wrote: >>>> 2. Relying of assembly directive emissions (i.e. .cfi_*), which is >>>> cumbersome and misses a lot of things like actual DWARF encoding. >>> >>> I'm not sure what you mean by "actual DWARF encoding" here. >>> (disclaimer: I've only