search for: newindex

I would like to take the values of observations and map them to a new index. I am not sure how to accomplish this. The result would look like so: x[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] becomes y[2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20] The "newindex" would not necessarily be this sequence, but a sequence I have stored in a vector, so it could be all kinds of values. here is what happens: > x <- rnorm(10) > myindex <- seq(from = 1,to = 20, by = 2) > y <- numeric() > y[myindex] <- x > y [1] -0.03745988...

Hi, I have a data frame and want to merge adjacent rows if some condition is met. There's an obvious solution using a loop but it is prohibitively slow because my data frame is large. Is there an efficient canonical solution for that? > head(d) rt dur tid mood roi x 55 5523 200 4 subj 9 5 56 5523 52 4 subj 7 31 57 5523 209 4 subj 4 9 58 5523 188 4 subj 4 7

...be nice if you tested today's CVS snapshot already to see if I accidentally broke something. :) http://dovecot.org/nightly/dovecot-latest.tar.gz Oh and one thing that I wanted for Dovecot v1.0 was nice documentation. I think the current wiki is a bit chaotic. I started http://wiki.dovecot.org/NewIndex a long time ago. Maybe I should finish it finally and put it as the new main index.. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://dovecot.o...

...tURI())', file /usr/local/src/wine-mozilla/dom/base/nsGlobalWindow.cpp, line 1311 ###!!! ASSERTION: How'd this happen?: 'IsAboutBlank(mDoc->GetDocumentURI())', file /usr/local/src/wine-mozilla/dom/base/nsGlobalWindow.cpp, line 1311 0[143ff8]: SinkContext::FlushTags: tag=head from newindex=0 at stackPos=0 fixme:mshtml:nsChannel_SetResponseHeader (0x342a5a0)->(0x33dc18 0x33db68 1) 0[143ff8]: WARNING: NS_ENSURE_SUCCESS(rv, rv) failed with result 0x804B000A: file /usr/local/src/wine-mozilla/uriloader/exthandler/nsExternalProtocolHandler.cpp, line 389 WARNING: NS_ENSURE_SUCCESS(rv, rv...

I use R CMD Rdindex man/*.Rd >INDEX in my makefile to generate an INDEX. When I then use R CMD build whatever the newindex seems to be in a slightly different order, resulting in a * checking whether index is up-to-date ... NO (because the result of diff is not empty) and a suggestion to use --force. However, --force results in the INDEX in my source directory being re-written, which means that I can't use it as a...

I started writing a new front page for wiki.dovecot.org: http://wiki.dovecot.org/NewIndex This is partially based on the comments in Documentation thread starting from here: http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2005-July/008076.html "A simple Dovecot installation" section is pretty much finished from my point of view. I hope it's clear enough for anyone wanting to install a w...

Hello, I think this is easy, but I can't seem to find a good way to do this in the R help. I have a list of sites, with multiple years of data for each site id. I want to create a new column that gives a number describing whether it is the 1st year ("1" ) the data was collected for the site, the second year ("2"), etc. I have different years for each siteid, but I don't

...ing: *** Renumbered SlotIndexes 24-56 *** So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like this: R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... ___BUT____ after the update, my new ran...

...> > So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like this: > > R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... > R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... > > Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B (also > new > after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). > collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and > correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 > > [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > &...

...ing: *** Renumbered SlotIndexes 24-56 *** So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like this: R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... ___BUT____ after the update, my new ran...

...gt; So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like > this: > > R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... > R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... > > Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B > (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). > collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and > correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 > > [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > >...

...ing: *** Renumbered SlotIndexes 24-56 *** So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like this: R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... ___BUT____ after the update, my new ran...

...after the update new live ranges look like >> this: >> >> R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... >> R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... >> R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... >> R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... >> >> Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B >> (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). >> collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and >> correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 >> >> [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... >> [0B,56r:0)[352...

On Aug 28, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think > I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... > > So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it > does something like this: > > // Move the instruction to its new

...ke > >> this: > >> > >> R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > >> R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > >> R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... > >> R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... > >> > >> Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B > >> (also new after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). > >> collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, > and > >> correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 > >> > >> [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r...

...> > So my 48B becomes 56B, so after the update new live ranges look like this: > > R2 = [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > R3 = [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > R4 = [0B,48r:0)[384r,416r:4)... > R5 = [0B,48r:0)[400r,416r:4)... > > Then in LiveIntervals::handleMove OldIndex 56B and NewIndex is 32B (also > new > after renumbering. But happens to match another old one). > collectRanges for MI figures that it is moving a paired register, and > correctly(?) selects these two ranges to update for %R2:R3 > > [0B,56r:0)[368r,416r:5)... > [0B,56r:0)[352r,416r:5)... > &...

Andy, I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it does something like this: // Move the instruction to its new location in the instruction stream. MachineInstr *MI = SU->getInstr(); if (IsTopNode) {