similar to: Difference in behaviour of model.matrix

Hello all, I have,say 4 R objects... bar1, bar2, bar3, bar4.. that I'd like to include in an R package "foobar". The desired functionality would be: > library(foobar) > data(foo) > ls() [1] "bar1" "bar2" "bar3" "bar4" I've tried the following two approaches: 1) I created the file 'datalist' under pre-build directory

Dear List, I need a barplot with vertical bars. Each bar should have a label. The problem is, that the labels are too long, so they overlap, or only every seccond label is displayed in the output. Here is a little syntax: dd <- c(100,110,90,105,95) barplot(dd,names.arg=c('Conduct Disorders','Attention Deficit', 'Eating Disorders',

I came across a weird-looking use of LLVM_FALLTHROUGH which I think is completely spurious, but I figured I should check with the group mind before ripping it out. Basically, if you have multiple cases with no code in between, you do *not* need LLVM_FALLTHROUGH, right? switch (Foo) { case Bar1: LLVM_FALLTHROUGH; // not needed case Bar2: some code; return; case Bar3:

Hi there, RFC 5258 (IMAP4 LIST command extensions) defines a ?RECURSIVEMATCH? selection option which ?forces the server to return information about parent mailboxes that don't match other selection options, but have some submailboxes that do.? (Section 3.5 makes the requirement even clearer.) However that's not what Dovecot 2.3.7 does. AFAICT no LIST response is returned for mailboxes

Hello, everybody!My guest has two graphics card when it is running, one is GTX960, and other is video card that is created by qemu.But my guest use video card default, and my screen is not light. I try checkout graphics card with vnc or spice, But it is suspend.Could you help me? And may i checkout card in my host system with command? Because my connection with vnc or spice is not stable.This is

Dear List, I'm exploring the use of class inheritance for a package were developing. I want to try to build on existing a class, i first want to extend this a bit using a virtual class and then extend this virtual class in multiple other classes. This would be similar to bar3 in the example below. Since there are nice functions for creating an object of the first superclass i would like

Adapt the NVC0 BAR driver to make it able to support chips that do not expose a BAR3. When this happens, BAR1 is then used for USERD mapping and the BAR alloc() functions is disabled, making GPU objects unable to rely on BAR for data access and falling back to PRAMIN. Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot at nvidia.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bar/nvc0.c | 101

Adapt the NVC0 BAR driver to make it able to support chips that do not expose a BAR3. When this happens, BAR1 is then used for USERD mapping and the BAR alloc() functions is disabled, making GPU objects unable to rely on BAR for data access and falling back to PRAMIN. Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot at nvidia.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bar/nvc0.c | 115

From: Michael Matz > Sent: 07 October 2018 16:53 ... > I think the examples I saw from Boris were all indirect inlines: > > static inline void foo() { asm("large-looking-but-small-asm"); } > static void bar1() { ... foo() ... } > static void bar2() { ... foo() ... } > void goo (void) { bar1(); } // bar1 should have been inlined > > So, while the

Hello, I want to have an operation foo with variable number of operands, and I am trying to achieve it using multiple operations. Let's say I want to have [FOO r1, r2], I am constructing the DAG as follows : consumeArg(r1) -> consumeArg(r2) -> FOO -> arg(r1) -> arg(r2) Note that the arrows are all "Chain"s. I need to have consumeArg(r1) because, I don't want the

Hello Mehdi Amini, Sorry for slow progress this week but it was due to interesting mistake of mine. I had build llvm with ipra enable by default and that build files were on my path ! Due to that next time I tried to build llvm it was terribly slow (almost 1 hour for 10% build ). I spend to much time on fixing this by playing around with environment variables, cmake options etc. But I think this

Hi, In the following instruction sequence, llvm.objectsize.i64(p) returns 6 (the entire *.ll is attached to the mail). Is this correct? Shouldn't the "object" refer to the entire block of memory being allocated? (char*) p = malloc(56) llvm.objectisize.i32(p+50); Thanks Shuxin This question is related to PR14988 (failure in bootstrap build with LTO). Part of the

On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Alexandre Courbot <acourbot at nvidia.com> wrote: > Adapt the NVC0 BAR driver to make it able to support chips that do not > expose a BAR3. When this happens, BAR1 is then used for USERD mapping > and the BAR alloc() functions is disabled, making GPU objects unable > to rely on BAR for data access and falling back to PRAMIN. > >

As mentioned in another thread, I notice that the params used to control symlinks feel a bit inefficient and inelegant, and quite limited. I think there might be a good opportunity to simplify and also make their management in Samba more powerful and adaptable to use-cases. I'm guessing this list is a good enough starting point to propose a smb.conf param change to this area and see what

samba: I am attempting to set up a "group share" directory on Debian "Wheezy" where any user can create or place files and directories, and every other user has full access to those files and directories. The directory will be accessed both locally and via Samba. Here is my Linux, distribution, and file system info: $ cat /proc/version Linux version

Dear experts: Is it possible to create a new function based on stats:::model.matrix.default so that an alternative factor coding is used when the function is called instead of the default factor coding? Basically, I'd like to reproduce the results in 'mat' below, without having to explicitly specify my desired factor coding (identity matrices) in the 'contrasts.arg'. dd

Hi all, I believe this is a bug in the model.matrix function. I'd like a second opinion before filing a bug report. If I have a nested covariate B with multiple values for just one level of A, I can not get a non-singular design matrix out of model.matrix > df <- data.frame(A = factor(c("a", "a", "x", "x"), levels = c("x",

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 4, 2016, at 7:56 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello Mehdi Amini, > > > > Sorry for slow progress this week but it was due to interesting mistake > of mine. I had build llvm with ipra enable by default and that build files >

Dear R Team, # Summary of the problem: setting contrasts as > contrasts(g) <- contr.treatment or > contrasts(g) <- matrix(c(1,-1,0),ncol=1) (i.e. without quotes around `contr.treatment' or `contr.sum', etc.) and fitting an lm model without an intercept results in a model matrix that lacks one column. (I do ask for forgiveness if this is not a bug but is due to my

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2016, at 8:32 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Jun 4, 2016, at 7:56 PM, vivek pandya <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> >> wrote: