search for: unfavored

Hi! I would like to conduct a Cochran`s Q Test in R, but have not found any suitable function. My first idea was: J <- as.table(matrix(c(6,16,2,4),ncol=2, dimnames = list("C" = c("Favorable","Unfavorable"),"Drug A Favorable"=c("B Favorable","B Unfavorable")))) L <- as.table(matrix(c(2,4,6,6),ncol=2, dimnames =

...some new "environment" item be introduced (in auth_request) in order to allow such data passing in a generic manner. I hope you consider my proposal to be reasonable. If desired, I could implement this myself and provide a patch for merging (based on 2.0.x). If my proposal is generally unfavored, it would be great if any alternative approaches for my situation were suggested. Thanks. Regards, J?rgen PS: please reply to my e-mail (or CC me), as I have not subscribed to the dovecot list

Recently our sysadm accidentally powercycled our server (RedHat8) after 198 days of uptime, and upon boot it insisted on checking one partition (/dev/sda7) in our RAID. When it was done, the files were in the state of August 23 last year, with anything newer either gone or invisible. I guess something went wrong with journaling data. What can I do to restore the current state (except restore from

will wine deliver the many and varied satellite streamed tv shows that are common for pc (turn your pc into a satellite ect) but don't seam to be available for mac? if so could someone point me in the correct direction. cant afford sky at the moment just been made redundant. [Question]

I''ve recently setup a system (Kernel 3.12.5-1-ARCH) which is layered as follows: /dev/sdb3 - cache0 (80 GB Intel SSD) /dev/sdc1 - backing device (2 TB WD HDD) sdb3+sdc1 => /dev/bcache0 On /dev/bcache0, there''s a btrfs filesystem with 2 subvolumes, mounted as / and /home. What''s been bothering me are the following entries in my kernel log: [13811.845540] incomplete

Martin, Thanks for the helpful reply. Alas I had forgotten that (implied) unfavorable comparisons of *nix systems with Windows systems would likely draw irate (but always substantive) responses on the R-devel list -- poor phrasing on my part. :) Regardless, let me try to address some of the concerns related to the construction of the MRE itself and try to see if we can clean away the shrubbery

A kind request for help please. MEMDISK is causing an issue with the Dell OptiPlex GX280 and GX620 platforms. Booting a PC-DOS/Ghost, disk image is successful (and proper) when using version 3.83. See results below: MEMDISK 3.83: Ramdisk at 0x07eeaa00, length 0x007bc000 command line: initrd=images/ghostclient/280_620/osbootc.img BOOT_IMAGE=memdisk MEMDISK: Image seems to have fractional end

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:26 PM Joan Lluch via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi All, > > In relation to the subject of this message I got my first round of patches successfully reviewed and committed. As a matter of reference, they are the following: > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D69116 > https://reviews.llvm.org/D69120 >

Hi, Building LLVM with a newer GCC version seems to generate several compiler warnings, some of which look like false positives. For example, the '-Winit-list-lifetime' warning added in GCC9 triggers for one of the constructors for ArrayRef, the one taking an initializer_list. How are false positive warnings dealt with in LLVM in general? It's of course possible to just ignore them

As before, I'm not convinced that we want to allow target-based enable/disable in instcombine for performance. That undermines having a target-independent canonical form in the 1st place. It's not clear to me what the remaining motivating cases look like. If you could post those here or as bugs, I think you'd have a better chance of finding an answer. Let's take a minimal example

Hello, I have the following situation: A firewall is blocking all SIP and RTP traffic in the side of some of my clients. My clients cannot change settings of the firewall. I need to solve this problem and I need some help from you. I have this idea: implement a SIP user agent which does not use well known SIP ports (uses http port 80 for example) and use other ports that are not blocked

For any of the examples shown below, if the logical equivalent using cmp + other IR instructions is no more than the number of IR instructions as the variant that uses shift, we should consider reversing the canonicalization. To make that happen, you would need to show that at least the minimal cases have codegen that is equal or better using the cmp form for at least a few in-tree targets. My

Dear all, There have been a variety of discussions on the R list regarding the use of R in clinical trials. The following post from the STATA list provides an interesting opinion regarding why SAS remains so popular in this arena: http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2008-01/msg00098.html Regards, -Cody Hamilton

Hi All, While implementing a custom 16 bit target for academical and demonstration purposes, I unexpectedly found that LLVM was not really ready for 8 bit and 16 bit targets. Let me expose why. Target backends can be divided into two major categories, with essentially nothing in between: Type 1: The big 32 or 64 bit targets. Heavily pipelined with expensive branches, running at clock

This is cross-posted from SO (https://stackoverflow.com/q/47079702/1414455), but I now feel that this needs someone from R-Devel to help understand why this is happening. We are facing a weird situation in our code when using R's [`runif`][1] and setting seed with `set.seed` with the `kind = NULL` option (which resolves, unless I am mistaken, to `kind = "default"`; the default being

So, I hear, in a couple weeks'' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down. What does that mean for this mailing list? Should we all be moving over to something at illumos or something? I''m going to encourage somebody in an official capacity at opensolaris to respond... I''m going to discourage unofficial responses, like, illumos enthusiasts etc simply trying to get people

I was trying to simply test bandwidth that Solaris/ZFS (Nevada b63) can deliver from a drive, and doing this: dd if=(raw disk) of=/dev/null gives me around 80MB/s, while dd if=(file on ZFS) of=/dev/null gives me only 35MB/s!?. I am getting basically the same result whether it is single zfs drive, mirror or a stripe (I am testing with two Seagate 7200.10 320G drives hanging off the same interface