search for: pushback

Is this the last bug of the year? Well, it's the last one from me, anyway... The "parse" function seems to give erratic behaviour when used in conjunction with "pushBack" on an open connection (R1.6.1, Windows 2000). Try this: > { cat( c( '1', 'a+b', '2'), file='r123.r', sep='\n'); tcon_ file( 'r123.r'); open( tcon); print( readLines( tcon, n=1)); pushBack( c( 'a+b'), tcon); print( parse( file=tco...

...uot;\"a\",\"b\"" "\"c\",\"d\"" "\"e" [4] "newline\",\"\\\"quoted simpleline\\\"\"" > > # double pushback is fine > pushBack(c(lines,lines), fc) > > # but nlines tells us we had 4 lines, which in fact are only 3 > nlines <- length(lines) > nlines [1] 4 > > # and the first scan eats up more than the first pushback > scan(fc, what="string", sep=",", nlines...

...> (think noalias) and other stuff, so it seems best to just talk about > "values" instead, and DenseMap<Value *, ...> instead of > DenseMap<Instruction *, ...>. I'm wondering that too. Can we replace LLVM function attributes with metadata? There's been some pushback to adding new function attributes in the past and it would be nice to be able to prototype new ones without having to change all of the vm core. Nick

Full_Name: Juho Vuori Version: 2.7.0 (2008-04-22) OS: Linux poseidon.fimr.fi 2.6.23.17-88.fc7PAE #1 SMP Thu May 15 00:22:53 EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux Submission from: (NULL) (193.166.188.194) Calling read.table() twice the following way causes a segmentation fault in R. Run R and type the following commands: > read.table(stdin()) 0: 1 2 3 1: 3 2: Error in scan(file, what, nmax, sep,

...nd other stuff, so it seems best to just talk about >> "values" instead, and DenseMap<Value *, ...> instead of >> DenseMap<Instruction *, ...>. > > I'm wondering that too. Can we replace LLVM function attributes with > metadata? There's been some pushback to adding new function > attributes in the past and it would be nice to be able to prototype > new ones without having to change all of the vm core. The pushback has been about adding lots of weird and special purpose extensions, not the encoding. -Chris

...it seems best to just talk about >>> "values" instead, and DenseMap<Value *, ...> instead of >>> DenseMap<Instruction *, ...>. >> >> I'm wondering that too. Can we replace LLVM function attributes with >> metadata? There's been some pushback to adding new function attributes >> in the past and it would be nice to be able to prototype new ones >> without having to change all of the vm core. > > The pushback has been about adding lots of weird and special purpose > extensions, not the encoding. The bar is higher...

Hello, Are there any chances of next stable release appearing soonish? I'm getting pushback from Homebrew maintainers about the massive amount of patching required to build the current stable on Mac, since all the patches have been merged in after last stable. (I'm also getting pushback about the 4GB download of virtual appliance, but as I understand that one is non-optional. Don'...

...ent position >> in >> the file. This is a significant change of behavior from R-3.4.4. >> >> Below is a test case that I used to home in on the problem. >> > Thanks for the report and analysis, you are right, readChar ignores the > buffer (and it also ignores the pushback). But please note that this > behavior is in line with the documentation, see ?readChar: readChar must > only be used with binary connections, but the example uses it on a text > connection. Buffering and pushback are only used on (readable) text > connections. I will check whether we c...

We are getting some pushback from our SA group regarding root having ssh user equivalence on the cluster where we run OCFS2. Is it required to have the ssh user equivalence setup for the root user when running OCFS2 ? Thanks in advance, Reid Reid McKinley ******************************************************...

I noticed an issue where readChar does not return the correct value after a call to readline. It appears that readChar is not aware of the buffering, so it reads from the end of the buffer, rather than the current position in the file. This is a significant change of behavior from R-3.4.4. Below is a test case that I used to home in on the problem. --- p<-"test2.txt"

...ry. Here's some simple test code I've been running: <CPP Code> #define PUSH_BACK_INTEGER(v, x) \ do {\ UNPROTECT_PTR(v);\ SET_LENGTH(v, GET_LENGTH(v) + 1);\ PROTECT(v);\ INTEGER_POINTER(v)[GET_LENGTH(v) - 1] = x;\ }\ while (false) SEXP R_SimplePushBackTest(SEXP args) { SEXP arg1, arg2, int_vect; PROTECT(arg1 = AS_INTEGER(CADR(args))); int n_reps = INTEGER_POINTER(arg1)[0]; PROTECT(arg2 = AS_LOGICAL(CADDR(args))); bool full_alloc = (LOGICAL_POINTER(arg2)[0] ? true : false); if (full_alloc) PROTECT(int_vect = NEW_IN...

...aining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --27464147-536455723-1259929222=:18586 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0912041222341.18586 at gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk> It's not to do with pushback per se. The works as one might expect, e.g. f <- file("test.txt", "r") pushBack('"A1\nA2"', f) pushBackLength(f) scan(f, "", quote='"') gives "A1\nA2" on a single line, then whatever was in test.txt. Rather, the issue is...

...r R 1.4. This is the section of code at the beginning of read.table. The loop starting with 'while (nlines < 5)' will read in the entire file, because there is no increment of 'nlines' in the loop. I traced through the code and this is what was happening. It then does a 'pushBack' of the entire file. In tracing through the code, this is where is appears to be taking the time. With the change noted below, the speed was similar to R 1.3.1 and the results were the same. Here is the current code with what I think is the additional statement needed: =================part...

In the past, I've seen some pushback on the list against adding more register classes. You can see it in the code as well, TargetLowering::getRegClassForInlineAsmConstraint() returns a vector of registers instead of a real register class. What is the reason we don't like adding register classes? Is it still a valid reason? The n...

...er flags to disable them, but with that I think you would risk missing other actual meaningful warnings. Would it make sense to add explicit diagnostic pragmas in the code for such cases, to only silence the warning where they are known to be false positives, or would such a patch be likely to face pushback during review? I apologize if this question is already answered somewhere in the documentation, I tried looking there first but I could not find anything. Cheers, Erik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/atta...

...end of the buffer, rather than the current position in > the file. This is a significant change of behavior from R-3.4.4. > > Below is a test case that I used to home in on the problem. Thanks for the report and analysis, you are right, readChar ignores the buffer (and it also ignores the pushback). But please note that this behavior is in line with the documentation, see ?readChar: readChar must only be used with binary connections, but the example uses it on a text connection. Buffering and pushback are only used on (readable) text connections. I will check whether we could report a ru...

...ne 2 did not have 2 elements > read.table(stdin()) 3: 1 2 4: 1 [1] V1 V2 <0 rows> (or 0-length row.names) > Analysis: These effects are due to a combination of (1) the fact that there appear to be various routes of accessing the standard input, depending on context, and (2) the use of pushback in the process of automatically figuring out the table format: * read.table uses .Internal(readTableHead(...)) to get the first nlines lines of the table (nlines = 5). * .Internal(readTableHead(...)) always returns nlines lines, adding empty lines if EOF comes before nlines li...

On Jun 21, 2011, at 8:51 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > In the past, I've seen some pushback on the list against adding more register classes. You can see it in the code as well, TargetLowering::getRegClassForInlineAsmConstraint() returns a vector of registers instead of a real register class. > > What is the reason we don't like adding register classes? Is it still a valid reas...

...the approach I took in D28791. In Fuchsia, we don't need crtbegin.o/crtend.o at all, but having these may be useful elsewhere, like LLVM-based Linux distributions that won't ship libgcc and will need to provide their own crtbegin.o/crtend.o. However, this approach has been met with a lot of pushback, where the primary reason has been the fact that crtbegin.o/crtend.o contain a lot of legacy cruft that may be difficult to get right across all different systems. 3. Define __dso_handle as part of the Clang builtin library in compiler-rt. This is the solution we're currently using with a down...

...ion is generated at each terminal node. Terminal nodes occur at various depths in the tree. We don't need to pass anything up the tree, just output from the terminal nodes. Is there a way to create a global data structure and have a function tack data onto that structure? sort of like the C++ pushback()? One solution is to output values to a file, and at the end read the file back. This worked ok, but is there a better way? _________________________________________________________________ Live.