search for: values2

Hello! # I have 3 vectors of values: values1<-rnorm(10) values2<-rnorm(10) values3<-rnorm(10) # In real life, all 3 vectors have a length of 25 # I create all possible combinations of 4 based on 10 elements: mycombos<-expand.grid(1:10,1:10,1:10,1:10) dim(mycombos) # Removing rows that contain pairs of identical values in any 2 of these columns: mycomb...

Given a data frame, or it could be a matrix if I choose to. The data consists of an ID, a year, and data for all 12 months. Missing values are a factor AND missing years. Id<-c(rep(67543,4),rep(12345,3),rep(89765,5)) Years<-c(seq(1989,1992,by =1),1991,1993,1994,seq(1991,1995,by=1)) Values2<-c(12,NA,34,21,NA,65,23,NA,13,NA,13,14) Values<-c(12,14,34,21,54,65,23,12,13,13,13,14) Data<-data.frame(Index=Id,Year=Years,Jan=Values,Feb=Values/2,Mar=Values2,Apr=Values2,Jun=Values,July=Values/3,Aug=Values2,Sep=Values, + Oct=Values,Nov=Values,Dec=Values2) Data Index Year Jan Feb M...

Readers, I am trying to use the function dotchart. The data is: > testdot category values1 values2 values3 values4 1 a 10 27 56 709 2 b 4 46 47 208 3 c 5 17 18 109 4 d 6 50 49 308 The following error occurs > dotchart(testdot,groups=testdot[,2]) Error in dotchart(testdot, labels = test...

I am making a stacked bar graph in Gruff. Could anyone help me by telling me how I can change the order in which the data is stacked. No matter what order I put the data in, I get the same result on the png picure. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because

...the model ABILITY -> V12, ability0 ABILITY -> V9, ability1 ABILITY -> V14, ability2 ABILITY -> V13, ability3 ABILITY -> V3, ability4 ABILITY -> V1, ability5 ABILITY -> V15, ability6 ABILITY -> V10, ability7 VALUES -> V17, values0 VALUES ->V18, values1 VALUES -> V8, values2 VALUES -> V2, values3 VALUES -> V5, values4 IDENTITY -> V16, identity0 IDENTITY -> V6, identity1 IDENTITY -> V11, identity2 IDENTITY -> V7, identity3 ABILITY <-> ABILITY, NA, 1 VALUES <-> VALUES, NA, 1 IDENTITY <-> IDENTITY, NA, 1 V1 <-> V1, error1 V2 <-...

Hello, I''m a beginner, so any hints are appreciated; I''m still trying to find my way around Rails code. For a bug I''ve found I need to create a table called "values" so I added this: create_table :values do |t| t.integer :value end among the other table creations in activerecord/test/cases/migration_test.rb. Is that ok? But then, when I run the tests

v9 was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00139.html This depends on these three series (the first two being single minor patches): https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00207.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00209.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00215.html There is no substantive change. I

This depends on the patch series "[PATCH 00/27] Reimplement many daemon APIs in OCaml." (https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00098.html) v8 was posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00274.html v9: - I split up the mega-patch into a more reviewable series of smaller, incremental patches. There are some other changes vs v8, but

This fixes almost everything. Note that it adds an extra commit which fixes the whole utf8/iconv business. It's probably better to list what isn't fixed: (1) I didn't leave the osinfo code around because I'm still haven't looked too closely at virt-builder-repository. Can't we just fetch this code from the git history when we need it? (2) I didn't change the way

v10: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-July/msg00245.html No actual change here, but I rebased and retested. Also this series now does not depend on any other patch series since everything else needed is upstream. Rich.

v6 was posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00103.html and this requires the utilities refactoring posted here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00169.html Inspection is now complete[*], although not very well tested. I'm intending to compare the output of many guests using old & new virt-inspector to see if I can find any

v5: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00065.html Since v5, this now implements inspection almost completely for Linux and Windows guests. Rich.

v7 was: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00169.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2017-June/msg00184.html I believe this addresses all comments received so far. Also it now passes a test where I compared about 100 disk images processed with old and new virt-inspector binaries. The output is identical in all cases except one which is caused by a bug in blkid