search for: significat

Hello, If I understand good, I can't have p-value for the nls model. I have 2 vectors. And I'am doing model <- nls(crf ~a*(1-exp(-x/b)) + c, data= d, start = list(a=1, b=3, c=0)) and I want to know If my result is significat, if I can't have p-value, how can I know it? Thank you

...ch an implementation? Is it a good option to write a qdisc for this task that will be used as a root qdisc? (every packet does travel through it, right?) Or is there a better location for this code, (or perhaps this is already done somewhere?) (it should be safe to assume that there will be not significat buffering delay in the physical device, since the rate will be much lower then the device an handle) With regards R.Harper _________________________________________________________________ Få alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk/

I've jsut installed Samba-2.2.4, from source on a Solaris 2.6 box. I'm looking to upgrade from some 2.0.x versions I'm running. I've createed a password entry using smbpasswd -a and added my password. My password has 9 characters in it. Using smbclient on the Solaris box, I can access the share, but I can't from Win95 or Win2000 clients (encryption is on). If I try to access

Is it possible to make Icecast run, for serving no more than 16 listeners, on Raspberry Pi? I simply want to dip my toe into the Linux universe, and this would be a fine excuse for me to try RP if it's doable. Thanks. Jeremiah Rogers Cell: 704-996-5334 Email: jeremiahzrogers at gmail.com Social Networking: /jzrogers

On Jul 21, 2008, at 8:21 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: >> I think that the right answer for llvm-gcc at "-O3 -g" is >> (eventually) >> for debug info to be updated where possible but discarded when >> necessary as you describe. For llvm-gcc we really really want the >> non- >> debug related output of the compiler to be identical between

Hi Chris, > > From this observation, I think it might be useful to have some kind of > > global flag that tells transformations whether it is allowed to remove > > debugging code in favour of optimizations. When we start making > > transformation passes debug-info aware, I think the need for something > > like this might increase. > > I think that the right

...way (we can focus on 1) first), easy cases could be caught right away. I'm afraid that only focussing on 1) now and later adding 2) might cause a lot of extra work and missed corner cases. However, I might be completely miscalculating this. If you think that this will not be a problem, or not a significat problem, I'll stop discussing it as well, and just commit my changes to get us to goal 1). > These three levels are actually a completely different approach, on an > orthogonal axis (reducing the size of debug info). I'm not really sure what you mean with this. The idea behind the...