search for: preferece

Hello, supposing that I have two or three clear categories for my data, lets say pet preferece across fish, cat, dog. Lets say most people rate their preference as being mostly one of the categories. I want to do pca on the data to see three 'groups' of people, one group for fish, one for cat and one for dog. I would like to see the odd person who likes both or all three in the (app...

Look at it, and you'll see the black outline is missing on the right side of the minimise button. This has been bugging me for a while. I've attached a zoomed in shot, so you can see easily what I mean. It's not a bug in the theme, but in gtk-window-decorator's Metacity theme support, as the border displays perfectly in Metacity. Does it happen with other themes? --------------

...eat, but it's at least a start :) > >-eric .debug_* => 0 looks good to me and I'd like to make the change because some users in this thread expressed preference, while some are bystanders, and I don't want to be the only one on the side opposite to the side of users expressing preferece. An argument I have in mind but haven't raised is that I don't want releases or HEAD to change behaviors too many times. This was one argument I did not want .debug_* => 0 for the upcoming release and .debug_* => -1 for a next one: there are 2 behavior changes rather than one: old LL...

...gt;> >-eric >> >> .debug_* => 0 looks good to me and I'd like to make the change because some >> users in this thread expressed preference, while some are bystanders, and I don't want >> to be the only one on the side opposite to the side of users expressing preferece. >> >> An argument I have in mind but haven't raised is that I don't want releases or >> HEAD to change behaviors too many times. This was one argument I did not want >> .debug_* => 0 for the upcoming release and .debug_* => -1 for a next one: there are 2 >&...

...; > >> .debug_* => 0 looks good to me and I'd like to make the change because some > > >> users in this thread expressed preference, while some are bystanders, and I don't want > > >> to be the only one on the side opposite to the side of users expressing preferece. > > >> > > >> An argument I have in mind but haven't raised is that I don't want releases or > > >> HEAD to change behaviors too many times. This was one argument I did not want > > >> .debug_* => 0 for the upcoming release and .debug_* =&...

...oks good to me and I'd like to make the change > because some > > > > >> users in this thread expressed preference, while some are > bystanders, and I don't want > > > > >> to be the only one on the side opposite to the side of users > expressing preferece. > > > > >> > > > > >> An argument I have in mind but haven't raised is that I don't > want releases or > > > > >> HEAD to change behaviors too many times. This was one argument I > did not want > > > > >> .debug_...

...I'd like to make the change > because some > >> > > > >> users in this thread expressed preference, while some are > bystanders, and I don't want > >> > > > >> to be the only one on the side opposite to the side of users > expressing preferece. > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> An argument I have in mind but haven't raised is that I don't > want releases or > >> > > > >> HEAD to change behaviors too many times. This was one argument > I did not want > >...

Created https://reviews.llvm.org/D84825 to be used for release/11.x I haven't seen a strong argument for changing other .debug_* but in any case I don't want to continue debating on this topic. * .debug_ranges & .debug_loc: -2 (lld<11: 0+addend) * .debug_*: 0 (lld<11: 0+addend, lld HEAD: -1) On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:47 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: