search for: simple2

...icularly elegant has come to mind, yet! Thanks! simple <- setRefClass('simple', fields = list(a = "character", b="numeric") ) gc() system.time(simple.list <- lapply(1:100000, function(i) { simple$new(a='foo',b=i) })) gc() setClass('simple2', representation(a="character",b="numeric")) setMethod("initialize", "simple2", function(.Object, a, b) { .Object at a <- a .Object at b <- b .Object }) gc() system.time(simple2.list <- lap...

...;-D[,3] if one uses these inputs and rund the program we get the following: >simple(xdata=x,ydata=y) Error in model.frame(formula, rownames, variables, varnames, extras, extranames, : invalid variable type why does this happen! i can get results if i change the program as follows: simple2<-function(xdata,ydata) { ofit<-lm(as.matrix(ydata)~as.matrix(xdata)) list(ofit) } but then the variable names, if they exist, are not preserved. how can i preserve these names. the results are now: > simple2(xdata=x,ydata=y) [[1]] Call: lm(formula = as.matrix(ydata) ~ as.matrix(xdata...

...B=stuff$B c=stuff$c rm(stuff) #stuff isn't needed anymore. ================================= I've even toyed with the superassignment operator, which also works, but I think it doesn't work for functions of functions. The following example works. ================================= simple2 <- function(m,n) { A <<- matrix(c(3,3,2,3),2,2) B <<- m c <<- 1:n } > stuff2=simple2(2,3) > stuff2 [1] 1 2 3 > A [,1] [,2] [1,] 3 2 [2,] 3 3 > B [1] 2 > c [1] 1 2 3 ================================= In the example below, I call the functi...

...uce the number >> of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be >> becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >> test? What's it actually testing? >> > I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing > case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the > struct and the backend generates a s...

...of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be >>>> becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>> >>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the >>&...

...of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be >>>> becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>> >>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the >>&...

...gt;>> of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be >>> becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>> test? What's it actually testing? >>> >> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the >> struct and the b...

...we have, this test case seems like it might >>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>> >>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>>>> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generate...

...invocations we have, this test case seems like it might >>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>> >>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>>> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy...

...gt;>> of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be >>> becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>> test? What's it actually testing? >>> >> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >> case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the >> struct and the b...

...s test case seems like it might >>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>> >>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>>>>> case. I am checking that llvm-li...

...seems like it might >>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>>>>>> case. I am checking...

...t having common test cases helps reduce the number of separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to test? What's it actually testing? DIE.h: checkCompileUnit could probably be called "getCompileUnitOrNull", the name "check*" seems to imply that it does some checking, which isn't true. DwarfCompileUnit.cpp:...

...s test case seems like it might >>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>> >>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing >>>>>> case. I am checking that llvm-li...

...seems like it might >>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the >>>>>>> testing case. I am check...

...cases helps reduce the number of > separate invocations we have, this test case seems like it might be > becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the > diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the > state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to > test? What's it actually testing? > I can add more comments. The source files are included in the testing case. I am checking that llvm-link only generates a single copy of the struct and the backend generates a single DIE and uses ref_...

...t might >>>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the >>>>>>>> testing...

...>>>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the >>>>>>>&...

...>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the >>>>&...

...>>>>>>> be becoming a little hard to follow what's under test. Just going from the >>>>>>>>>>> diff I'm not sure what's what. Could you give a brief description of the >>>>>>>>>>> state of type-unique-simple2 files? What's involved? What's it meant to >>>>>>>>>>> test? What's it actually testing? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can add more comments. The source files are included in the >>>>&...