similar to: [LLVMdev] [Patch] Fix for PR9499 (confusing behavior of FastFoldingSetNode).

This fixes a bug in SmallVectorImpl<>::insert, which were not behaving correctly on inserting an empty range into an empty vector: #include <llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h> #include <cassert> int main() { llvm::SmallVector<int, 1> v, w; llvm::SmallVector<int, 1>::iterator it = v.insert(v.end(), w.begin(), w.end()); assert(it == v.end()); } The insert function(s)

Johannes Schaub (litb) wrote: > This fixes a bug in SmallVectorImpl<>::insert, which were not behaving > correctly on inserting an empty range into an empty vector: > > #include <llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h> > #include <cassert> > > int main() { > llvm::SmallVector<int, 1> v, w; > llvm::SmallVector<int, 1>::iterator it = >

Hi, I think lit.py’s current behavior is somewhat unintuitive in the presence of -v (and not using -vv), so I’m proposing that it be changed. Current behavior: -v: Prints all the substituted lines, not clear which line failed :( -vv: Prints all the lines up to and including the line that failed :) Option 1: -v: Prints only the failing line :) -vv: Same as today. :) -vvv (new): Prints all the

The existing behaviour seems inutitive to me. I would consider these invariants for n vector x_i's each with size m: * nrow(rbind(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n)) equals n * ncol(rbind(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n)) equals m Additionally, wouldn't you expect rbind(x_1[i], x_2[i]) to equal rbind(x_1, x_2)[, i, drop = FALSE] ? Hadley On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 3:26 PM Gabriel Becker <gabembecker at

Hi Gabe, ? ncol(data.frame(aa=c("a", "b", "c"), AA=c("A", "B", "C"))) ? # [1] 2 ? ncol(data.frame(aa="a", AA="A")) ? # [1] 2 ? ncol(data.frame(aa=character(0), AA=character(0))) ? # [1] 2 ? ncol(cbind(aa=c("a", "b", "c"), AA=c("A", "B", "C"))) ? #

On 5/16/19 17:48, Gabriel Becker wrote: Hi Herve, Inline. On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 4:45 PM Pages, Herve <hpages at fredhutch.org<mailto:hpages at fredhutch.org>> wrote: Hi Gabe, ncol(data.frame(aa=c("a", "b", "c"), AA=c("A", "B", "C"))) # [1] 2 ncol(data.frame(aa="a", AA="A")) # [1] 2

I've always found the name ComputeMaskedBits a bit unintuitive, and since r154011 it's even worse because there is no masking going on whatsoever: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20120402/140280.html Is there any appetite for a global rename to ComputeKnownBits? Or any other better names? Thanks, Jay.

On 16/04/2020 11:12, Ralph Boehme via samba wrote: > Am 4/16/20 um 10:42 AM schrieb Giuseppe Lo Presti: [...] >> the other locking settings? In particular: >> >> ? posix locking = no >> ? strict locking = no >> ? oplocks = no >> ? level2 oplocks = no >> ? kernel oplocks = no > > that depends on your use case. If you sharing SMB only

Mu Qiao wrote: > Hi devs, > > We are implementing a library that interprets shell scripts so that > other programs could efficiently talk to bash. We'd like to hear your > advice on whether LLVM is appropriate for us. Here are our considerations: > > In most cases our library will interpret each script just once. Our > current approach is using a manual

I saw some unexpected behavior in the interaction of hosts allow and hosts deny on Samba 3.0.28. I built Samba 3.2.4 just to be sure it wasn't something that had been fixed. I saw the same behavior. I'm not sure if it is a bug or a failure on my part to understand the documentation or misleading documentation. If I have a share defined as [export] comment = exported

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=904 Summary: Matching ah without optional argument gives unintuitive result Product: iptables Version: 1.4.x Platform: arm OS/Version: Debian GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: iptables AssignedTo:

Hi all, Apologies if this has been asked before (a quick google didn't find it for me),and I know this is a case of behaving as documented but its so unintuitive (to me at least) that I figured I'd bring it up here anyway. I figure its probably going to not be changed, but I'm happy to submit a patch if this is something R-core feels can/should change. So I recently got bitten by

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Evan Shaw <chickencha at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Evan Shaw <chickencha at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm writing a frontend with the LLVM C bindings for a language that >>> has a goto statement, similar to

Hi Herve, Inline. On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 4:45 PM Pages, Herve <hpages at fredhutch.org> wrote: > Hi Gabe, > > ncol(data.frame(aa=c("a", "b", "c"), AA=c("A", "B", "C"))) > # [1] 2 > > ncol(data.frame(aa="a", AA="A")) > # [1] 2 > > ncol(data.frame(aa=character(0),

Reading the documentation for 'apply', I understand the following is working exactly as documented: > M<-matrix(1:6,ncol=2) > M [,1] [,2] [1,] 1 4 [2,] 2 5 [3,] 3 6 > apply(M,2,function(column) column+c(1,2,3)) [,1] [,2] [1,] 2 5 [2,] 4 7 [3,] 6 9 > apply(M,1,function(row) row+c(1,2)) [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 2 3 4

On 13 May 2014 21:27, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 May 2014 14:33, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: >> I've always found the name ComputeMaskedBits a bit unintuitive, and >> since r154011 it's even worse because there is no masking going on >> whatsoever: >> >>

On 04/20/2011 05:26 PM, Sven Hartge wrote: > Papp Tamas<tompos at martos.bme.hu> wrote: > >> On 04/20/2011 01:47 PM, Sven Hartge wrote: >>> "du" also accounts for the metadata of the filesystem. With Maildir++ >>> you have many files per directory which causes the directory inode to >>> increase in size. After mails are deleted, the now empty

hey all 'scp -r ' follows symlinks. IMO this is a bug and should be changed - it: a) hampers the use of scp. As it stands, I cannot use 'scp -r' because of this behavior. If someone links to '/', or if I hit a recursive symlink, I'm screwed. b) It is inconsistant with cp. When you 'cp -r' on a file, it does NOT follow the symlink. When you scp

Hi devs, We are implementing a library that interprets shell scripts so that other programs could efficiently talk to bash. We'd like to hear your advice on whether LLVM is appropriate for us. Here are our considerations: In most cases our library will interpret each script just once. Our current approach is using a manual implementation based on ANTLR and C++, so actually we are executing

R-helpers, I am hoping to find someone who uses both R and program Stata for GLMs. I am a beginner R user, finding my own way through; learning code etc. at the same time as learning the statistics I need to complete my project. What I have is the code from Stata and am trying to reproduce the same analysis in R - my program of choice. . glm count md ms rf sg, family(poisson)