Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "disproven".
Did you mean:
disprove
2020 May 15
3
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
There is still the situation where **both** 'sep' and 'collapse' are
specified:
> paste(integer(0), "nth", sep="", collapse=",")
[1] "nth"
In that case 'recycle0' should **not** be ignored i.e.
paste(integer(0), "nth", sep="", collapse=",", recycle0=TRUE)
should return the empty string
2020 May 22
2
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...were declared in the same call. I
> don't
> >> think the value of recycle0 should be silently ignored if it is
> actively
> >> specified.
> >>
> >> ~G
>
> Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree (or be
> be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
>
> 1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0() which by default
> (recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not change anything,
> hence paste() / paste0() behave completely back-compatible
> if recycle0 is kept to FALS...
2020 May 21
0
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...>> recycle0 were TRUE and collapse were declared in the same call. I don't
>> think the value of recycle0 should be silently ignored if it is actively
>> specified.
>>
>> ~G
Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree (or be
be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0() which by default
(recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not change anything,
hence paste() / paste0() behave completely back-compatible
if recycle0 is kept to FALSE.
2) recycle0 = TRUE i...
2020 May 22
2
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...> think the value of recycle0 should be silently ignored if it
> > is actively
> > >> specified.
> > >>
> > >> ~G
> >
> > Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree (or be
> > be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
> >
> > 1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0() which by
> > default
> > (recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not change anything,
> > hence paste() / paste0() behave completely bac...
2020 May 22
0
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...ll. I don't
> ? ? >> think the value of recycle0 should be silently ignored if it
> is actively
> ? ? >> specified.
> ? ? >>
> ? ? >> ~G
>
> Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree (or be
> be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
>
> 1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0() which by
> default
> ? ?(recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not change anything,
> ? ?hence? paste() / paste0() behave completely back-compatible
> ?...
2020 May 22
0
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...cle0 should be silently ignored if it
>> > is actively
>> > >> specified.
>> > >>
>> > >> ~G
>> >
>> > Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree (or be
>> > be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
>> >
>> > 1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0() which by
>> > default
>> > (recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not change
>> anything,
>> > hence paste() / p...
2020 May 22
5
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...>? ? ?is actively
> >? ? ? ? ? >> specified.
> >? ? ? ? ? >>
> >? ? ? ? ? >> ~G
> >
> >? ? ?Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree
> (or be
> >? ? ?be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
> >
> >? ? ?1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0()
> which by
> >? ? ?default
> >? ? ? ? ?(recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not
> change anything,
>...
2020 May 24
0
paste(character(0), collapse="", recycle0=FALSE) should be ""
...> >> specified.
> > > >>
> > > >> ~G
> > >
> > > Just to summarize what I think we should know and agree
> > (or be
> > > be "disproven") and where this comes from ...
> > >
> > > 1) recycle0 is a new R 4.0.0 option in paste() / paste0()
> > which by
> > > default
> > > (recycle0 = FALSE) should (and *does* AFAIK) not
> >...
2007 Dec 14
21
Some silly benchs (was: 1.9)
Guys,
Just for fun, I tried to see (I know, a silly way to test it) how much
overhead we have calling the C functions of the extensions.
the benchmark script and the results:
http://pastie.caboo.se/128646
The naive C extension:
http://pastie.caboo.se/128647
I compared 1.8.6 (VC6 and mingw builds) against a fresh checkout of ruby trunk.
What I understand from that is 1.9 is slower than 1.8
2021 May 13
17
Bug#988477: xen-hypervisor-4.14-amd64: xen dmesg shows (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT on sata pci device
Package: src:xen
Version: 4.14.1+11-gb0b734a8b3-1
Severity: critical
Justification: causes serious data loss
X-Debbugs-Cc: debianbts at virtualzone.hu
Dear Maintainer,
after a clean install of bullseye/testing the xen dmesg shows the following message:
(XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: 0000:01:00.1 d0 addr fffffffdf8000000 flags 0x8 I
this is the sata device:
01:00.1 SATA controller: Advanced Micro