search for: interpreation

Bonjour, je voulais savoir si wxruby2 est intégré à l''interpréteur ruby? Que veut dire $0 ? merci Sebastien _______________________________________________ wxruby-users mailing list wxruby-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wxruby-users

Hello, [really hoping not to ask something the 1001th time] I need single backslashes printed for generating TeX-code. That works: > print("\begin{tabular}") [1] "\begin{tabular}" But \h seems to be interprated in some way: > print('\hline') [1] "hline" Hm, trying to mask the backslash: > print('\\hline') [1]

Hi, I am wondering how I should interpreate the output of optFederov() in AlgDesign. Specially I want to know what is $D, $A, $Ge and $Dea, which one I can use as an efficiency to say how good the optimal design is. I only know when a orthogonal design comes, $D = 1. I red the pdf document -- vignette("AlgDesign") [Just type: vignette("AlgDesign") in R, you will get

...here because if the regressions are done separately on each cloud, then there really isn't a relationship between x and y. I was just wondering 1) what assumption in regression is being violated in the first case or 2) possibly if the regression is valid and the results just have some different interpreation ? Thanks. Mark -------------------------------------------------------- This is not an offer (or solicitation of an offer) to buy/se...{{dropped}}

hello, I need help because I don't understand the syntaxe "else" how can I write it for example I writed a script to cut missings values and I have errors > if(na==length(C)){ + pos=match(0,match(donGeno[[na-1]],donGeno[[na]],nomatch=0)) + for(k in 1:(na-1)) { + if(pos==1) {donGeno[[k]] <-

...More fundamentally, I would appreciate any comment on this implementation or suggestion about the best way of implementing streams in R. My objective is to implement logic programming interpreter in R as done in LISP by G.F.Luger in his book or by Abelson & Sussman in "Structure and Interpreation of Computer Program". Thank you, Gabriel ### ### Examples ### > fib<-fibonacci.stream(0,1) Note that the fibonacci.stream() function is a nonterminating recursive function. It works only because of the delayed evaluation introduced by the delay() function in cons.stream() . It...

I think median() behaves as designed: As long as the argument can be ordered, the "middle observation" makes sense, except when the middle falls between two categories, and you can't define and average of the two candidates for a median. The "sick man" would seem to be var(). Notice that it is also inconsistent with cov(): >

...here because if the regressions are done separately on each cloud, then there really isn't a relationship between x and y. I was just wondering 1) what assumption in regression is being violated in the first case or 2) possibly if the regression is valid and the results just have some different interpreation ? Thanks. Mark -------------------------------------------------------- This is not an offer (or solicitation of an offer) to buy/se...{{dropped}} ______________________________________________ R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read t...

Hi, In stlmethods(stats) says: range.bars logical indicating if each plot should have a bar at its right side which are of equal heights in user coordinates. I don't understand the meaning of: "which are of equal heights in user coordinates" I'm working with monthly time series, with a clear seasonal cycle, but a not so clear trend, is just what I'm looking for. How

...urrent documentation". and after experimentation (a "complete factorial design" of argument settings), I'm not entirely happy with the result.... and one reason is that 'exclude = NULL' and (e.g.) 'exclude = c()' are (still) handled differently: From a usual interpreation, both should mean "do not exclude any factor entries (and levels) from tabulation" but one of the two changes the default of 'useNA' and the other does not. If we want a change anyway (and have to update the doc), it could be "more logical" to replace the line abov...

Dear all, I'm facing a problem in estimation of glm model with weibull distribution. I run this : eqn0<-formula(fdh~cup1+cup2+cup3+cup4+fin1+vd1+cm2+cm4+milieu+cpro1+cpro2+cpro3a+cpro3b+schef+log(y)) regWeib0<-vglm(eqn0,family=weibull,subset(br, fdh<1)) I have en estimation but there is a message saying that regularity conditions are violated : Message d'avis : In eval(expr,

Hello, Is there a reason for the following behaviour? > mean(c("1","2","3")) [1] NA Warning message: In mean.default(c("1", "2", "3")) : l'argument n'est ni num?rique, ni logique : renvoi de NA But: > var(c("1","2","3")) [1] 1 And also: >

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > The GPL makes claims that are in conflict with the law because these claims are > not amongst what the list in the law permits and that are thus void. The GPL is all that gives you permission to distribute. If it is void then you have no permission at all to distribute any

Jean-Luc, Please keep the communications on the list, for the benefit of others, now and in the future, via the list archive. I am adding r-devel back here. I can't speak to the rationale in some of these cases. As I noted, it may be (is likely) due to differing authors over time, and there may have been relevant use cases at the time that the code was written, resulting in the various

...ic linkage is kind of fuzzy. US juries are > supposed to focus on intent and are pretty unpredictable - I wouldn't > want to take a chance on what they might decide. Given the fact that there is not a single trustworthy lawjer in the US that writes about the GPL and that follows your interpreation, I am relaxed. > > These rules make many combinations a "collective work" that is > > permitted. The cdrtools and ZFS on Linux match these rules - well, I assume > > that the ZFS integration code follows the rules that are needed for a clean > > collective work. &...

I have been experimenting with different possibilities for an "introduction" page for my packages. That is, a good place to tell users about the most important things in a package, and where to start. Recently there was a discussion about this, and a suggestion to use <foo>-package.Rd, and also a function that generates a skeleton document. My problem with this suggestion is

...fuzzy. US juries are >> supposed to focus on intent and are pretty unpredictable - I wouldn't >> want to take a chance on what they might decide. > > Given the fact that there is not a single trustworthy lawjer in the US that > writes about the GPL and that follows your interpreation, I am relaxed. It's not 'my' interpretation. Nor does my interpretation matter much. It is the owners of the GPL licensed code that would be allowed to claim damages if the GPL terms are not followed. And what they have published is that all of the runtime linked components are inclu...

...and after experimentation (a "complete factorial design" of > argument settings), I'm not entirely happy with the result.... and one reason > is that 'exclude = NULL' and (e.g.) 'exclude = c()' > are (still) handled differently: From a usual interpreation, > both should mean > "do not exclude any factor entries (and levels) from tabulation" > but one of the two changes the default of 'useNA' and the other > does not. If we want a change anyway (and have to update the doc), > it could be &quot...

My impression from reading http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#clp is that it's intended to be possible to compile programs using llvm and distribute the resulting binaries freely. This does not seem to be the case. I'm assuming no portion of LLVM is included in the compiled binaries, only the runtime library components, so that the compiled binaries are not derived from LLVM.

...tation (a "complete >> factorial design" of argument settings), I'm not entirely >> happy with the result.... and one reason is that 'exclude >> = NULL' and (e.g.) 'exclude = c()' are (still) handled >> differently: From a usual interpreation, both should mean >> "do not exclude any factor entries (and levels) from >> tabulation" but one of the two changes the default of >> 'useNA' and the other does not. If we want a change >> anyway (and have to update the doc), it could be &q...