search for: resis

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 21 matches for "resis".

Did you mean: redis
2005 Nov 15
1
An optim() mystery.
I have a Master's student working on a project which involves estimating parameters of a certain model via maximum likelihood, with the maximization being done via optim(). A phenomenon has occurred which I am at a loss to explain. If we use certain pairs of starting values for optim(), it simply returns those values as the ``optimal'' values, although they are definitely not
2024 Aug 09
1
a fast way to do my job
Dear R users, I am running the following code below, the gem751be.rpkm is a dataframe with dim of 751 samples by 35164 variables, 73 phenotypic variables in the furst to 73rd column and 35091 genomic variables or genes in the 74th to 35164th columns. What I need to do is to calculate the residuals for each gene using the simple linear regression model of genelist[i] ~ purity2; The following
2004 Jun 30
1
AS_NUMERIC and as.numeric - Could someone explain?
Dear List, I stepped into a strange effect which I can't explain to myself (probably due to lack of knowledge on R internals). I have four vectors a,b,c and z of size 10000 each. With these vectors I call .Call("hyp2f1forrey", a, b, b, z, PACKAGE = "hyp2f1") to access SEXP hyp2f1forrey(SEXP a, SEXP b, SEXP c, SEXP x) { int i,n; double *xa, *xb, *xc, *xx,
2004 Feb 24
6
be careful: using attach in R functions
Hi there, I have just found that the ``attach'' function can get you into trouble when called many times. For example, you have a simulation routine called ``f()'', in which you used ``attach'' and no corresponding ``detach''. Then you call this function many times. You will find that the system performance get slower and slower, because you are making the R
2009 May 29
3
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
On May 28, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Jonathan Ragan-Kelley wrote: > In the current trunk, System/Atomic.[h,cpp] define void > llvm::sys::MemoryFence(). This conflicts with the MemoryFence macro in > <windows.h> and (since it's a preprocessor macro, and not a scoped > function definition) causes the sys::MemoryFence definition on > Atomic.cpp:23 to explode, as it's
2009 Jun 02
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
Yes, indeed. On May 28, 10:41 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: > > Wait, it defines MemoryFence() AND MemoryBarrier()?? > > Sheesh, they had to take all the reasonable names.  :-/
2008 Feb 07
2
How to calculate normality of the residuals from a test in R?
En innebygd og tegnsett-uspesifisert tekst ble skilt ut... Navn: ikke tilgjengelig Nettadresse: https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/attachments/20080207/891f1e80/attachment.pl
2008 Apr 18
2
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
On Apr 17, 7:01 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: > Gabor, > > Have you updated llvm2cpp to generate calls to the appropriate new Yes. These are caught by my conversion scripts. > constructors? Also, could you check the code in the tutorials to make > sure it matches the new API? Good point, will do. Th...
2010 Jan 29
2
[LLVMdev] 64bit MRV problem: { float, float, float} -> { double, float }
Hey Duncan, hey everybody else, I just stumbled upon a problem in the latest llvm-gcc trunk which is related to my previous problem with the 64bit ABI and structs: Given the following code: struct float3 { float x, y, z; }; extern "C" void __attribute__((noinline)) test(float3 a, float3* res) { res->y = a.y; } int main(void) { float3 a; float3 res; test(a,
2008 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
On Apr 18, 5:51 pm, heisenbug <ggr... at gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 17, 7:01 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: > > > Gabor, > > > Have you updated llvm2cpp to generate calls to the appropriate new > > Yes. These are caught by my conversion scripts. > > > constructors?  Also, could you check the code in the tutorials to make > > sure it matches...
2010 Jan 29
0
[LLVMdev] 64bit MRV problem: { float, float, float} -> { double, float }
Hi Ralf, > llvm-gcc -c -emit-llvm -O3 produces this: > > %struct.float3 = type { float, float, float } > define void @test(double %a.0, float %a.1, %struct.float3* nocapture > %res) nounwind noinline { > entry: > %tmp8 = bitcast double %a.0 to i64 ; <i64> [#uses=1] > %tmp9 = zext i64 %tmp8 to i96 ; <i96> [#uses=1] >
2010 Jan 25
0
[LLVMdev] 64bit MRV problem: { float, float, float} -> { double, float }
Hi Ralf, > I do not understand why this behaviour is required. What is the problem > in having a function receive a single struct-parameter with three floats > compared to two scalar parameters? > > source-code (C++): > struct Test3Float { float a, b, c; }; > void test(Test3Float param, Test3Float* result) { ... } if you compile this with GCC, you will see that it too
2010 Jan 25
2
[LLVMdev] 64bit MRV problem: { float, float, float} -> { double, float }
Uh, sorry, did not pay attention where I was replying ;) Hey Duncan, I do not understand why this behaviour is required. What is the problem in having a function receive a single struct-parameter with three floats compared to two scalar parameters? source-code (C++): struct Test3Float { float a, b, c; }; void test(Test3Float param, Test3Float* result) { ... } bitcode:
2009 Jun 02
1
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
On Jun 1, 2009, at 11:17 PM, Jonathan Ragan-Kelley wrote: > Yes, indeed. Are they macros or functions? If macros, why not just #undef them at the top of Atomics.h? -Chris > > > On May 28, 10:41 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: >> >> Wait, it defines MemoryFence() AND MemoryBarrier()?? >> >> Sheesh, they had to take all the reasonable names. :-/ > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu h...
2008 Apr 17
0
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
Gabor, Have you updated llvm2cpp to generate calls to the appropriate new constructors? Also, could you check the code in the tutorials to make sure it matches the new API? --Owen On Apr 15, 2008, at 5:32 PM, Gabor Greif wrote: > Hi All, > > here comes the patch for the second wave of Use class size reduction. > > I have included all the machinery that is needed, and it is
2009 Jun 02
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
Is this actually the case? I can't find it documented anywhere on MSDN or the rest of the internet. --Owen On Jun 1, 2009, at 11:17 PM, Jonathan Ragan-Kelley wrote: > Yes, indeed. > > On May 28, 10:41 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: >> >> Wait, it defines MemoryFence() AND MemoryBarrier()?? >> >> Sheesh, they had to take all the reasonable names. :-/ > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu h...
2012 Aug 24
0
A question about GRAMMAR calculations in the FAM_MDR algorithm
Dear R developers: I am a PHD candidate student in the school of public health of Peking University and my major is genetic epidemiology. I am learning the FAM-MDR algorithm, which is used to detect the gene-gene and gene-environment interactions in the data of pedigree. The codes were written by Tom Cattaert of the University of Liege. The algorithms and the sample datasets are available at
2009 May 29
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
...dio build. The trivial fix is to #undef MemoryFence immediately after including <windows.h>, since it's clearly assumed not to exist. A deeper and safer fix might consider avoiding a name conflict with a core system macro on a widely used platform. On May 17, 1:20 pm, Owen Anderson <resis... at mac.com> wrote: > On May 17, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > Owen, I would really rather that you didn't take this path.  Threading > > support in LLVM should always be optional: it should be possible to > > use LLVM on systems where we don't h...
2007 Feb 05
1
Recommendations for Lexmark Z11 driver install?
I've "inherited" an old Lexmark Z11 and would like to plug it in to my CentOS 4 box as a second printer. I shut down, hooked it up to the parallel port, rebooted, and hwbrowser recognizes it on /dev/lp0, so I ran through setting it up as a queue with printconf-gui. However, printing the test page fails because the renderer "lz11.foomatic" is not found (details below for
2009 May 17
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Atomics.h
On May 17, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > Owen, I would really rather that you didn't take this path. Threading > support in LLVM should always be optional: it should be possible to > use LLVM on systems where we don't have support for threading > operations. Indeed, some systems don't support threads! I'm not trying to make it required. I had provided