Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "errmessages".
Did you mean:
errmessage
2002 Jan 18
1
TeX error generated by R CMD CHECK
Hello,
can anyone explain the following error I get when trying to
use the CHECK command to check a new version of my pakcage under 1.4.0?
******
./R CMD check ~/GLMMGibbs.0.5.1/GLMMGibbs
* checking for working latex ... OK
* using log directory `/homef/jonm/R-1.4.0/bin/GLMMGibbs.Rcheck'
...
<Installs library, documentation, and then performs various tests,
including the example,
2009 Feb 04
2
[nut-commits] svn commit r1765 - in trunk: . drivers man
...crodowell.c/h into drivers/. add man/microdowell.8. Adjusted
> drivers/Makefile.am and man/makefile.am. Adjusted the code for 2.4.0 in the
> microdowell.c.
Besides the things already mentioned by others and the obvious
formatting issue, just a couple of nits to pick:
> 93 static char *ErrMessages[] = {
[...]
> 187 }
Consider returning the error message through something like
> 124 case ERR_NO_ERROR:
> 125 return "OK";
instead of doing this indirectly through an index in an array of error
strings. This makes sure these don't get out of sync.
> 547...
2007 Jul 05
2
[LLVMdev] PATCH (rest of code changes) "bytecode" --> "bitcode"
Here is the bulk of the sanitizing.
My residual doubts center around the question
whether we still do/want to support (un)compressed *byte*code
in 2.0/2.1.
I need a definitive word on this to proceed.
My understanding is that bytecode is already gone, but there are
still some functions/enums that really deal with *byte*code
(instead of *bit*code).
I did not touch those areas, so the attached