similar to: interesting feature

Hi everybody. The question: I get two vectors 'iFalseFalse' and 'i2'. I think they should be the same but they are not. Is it because R does not handle complicated logical expressions in such cases or I do something wrong? > z1 = c(NA, "", 3, NA, "", 3) > z2 = c("", "", 3, NA, 3, NA) > cV = (as.character(z1)==as.character(z2))

Today is a good day for asking question, I guess. > c() NULL > > length(c())==0 [1] TRUE > > r = ifelse(length(c())!=0, c(), c(1,2)) ### OK > r = c() ### OK > r = ifelse(length(c())==0, c(), c(1,2)) ### why this is not OK (given > the previous two)? Error in "[<-"(`*tmp*`, test, value = rep(yes, length =

I have two factors l1, l2, and I'd like to merge them. (Remark: The factors can not be converted to charaters) Function c() does not give me the result I want: > l1 = factor(c('aaaa', 'bbbb')) > l2 = factor(c('ccc', 'dd')) > lMerge = factor(c(l1, l2)) > lMerge [1] 1 2 1 2 Levels: 1 2 > I'd like to merge l1 and l2 and to get lMerge

The funciton c() works differently for strings and for factors: For strings: > l = c('a', 'b') > l [1] "a" "b" For factors: > l = c(factor('a'), factor('b')) > l [1] 1 1 What should be the right technique for merging factors? -- Svetlana Eden Biostatistician II School of Medicine

Thank you for your answers, I have another question: the behaviour of setdiff(indicesFalse, indicesNA) does not seem predictable to me. > indices [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 > compareVector [1] NA TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE NA > indicesNA = indices[is.na(compareVector)] > indicesNA [1] 1 6 > indicesFalse = indices[compareVector == FALSE] > indicesFalse [1] NA 5 NA >

The Details. In the following version. > version _ platform i386-pc-linux-gnu arch i386 os linux-gnu system i386, linux-gnu status major 1 minor 8.1 year 2003 month 11 day 21 language R > lookup.xport ignores some datasets in sas export file. File "emptySasData3.xpt" (available at http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/tmp/emptySasData3.xpt) is a

> version _ platform i386-pc-linux-gnu arch i386 os linux-gnu system i386, linux-gnu status major 1 minor 8.1 year 2003 month 11 day 21 language R > aa <- as.POSIXct(c('1/1/1980','1/2/1980','')) > ifelse(is.na(aa),as.POSIXct('1/3/1980'),aa) Error in rep.int(unclass(x), times) : Argument "times" is missing,

Greetings, I am interested in creating a stepwise fixed order regression function. There's a function for this already called add1( ). The F statistics are calculated using type 2 anova (the SS and the F changes don't match SPSS's). You can see my use of this at the very end of the email. What I want: a function to make an anova table with f changes and delt R^2. I ran into

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Anastasiya Ruzhanskaya via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I am trying to print it like this (maybe here is smth wrong?) > > > LazyValueInfo &LV = getAnalysis<LazyValueInfoWrapperPass>().getLVI(); > DominatorTree &DT = > getAnalysis<DominatorTreeWrapperPass>().getDomTree(); > LV.printLVI(F,

Hello, I am trying to figure out, what vrp propagation does in llvm. I tried this program: #include <stdio.h> int main() { int s = 0; int j = 0; for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { j = j+i+1; s+=j; } return (s+j); } And got this under optimized version ( I don't want everything to be eliminated) define i32 @main()

I am primarily interested in phi nodes and their induction variables, in ValueTracking file there is an analysis of them, but if the upper bound is inf, it is not working? 2017-08-07 11:41 GMT+02:00 Anastasiya Ruzhanskaya < anastasiya.ruzhanskaya at frtk.ru>: > So, it is not supported to determine by this instruction : %cmp = icmp slt > i32 %i.03, 99, > that %i.03 = phi i32 [ 0,

Dear R People: Here is a goofy question: I want to extract the zip code from an address and here is my work so far: > add1 results.formatted_address "200 W Rosamond St, Houston, TX 77076, USA" > add1[1][32:36] <NA> <NA> <NA> <NA> <NA> NA NA NA NA NA > str(add1) Named chr "200 W Rosamond St, Houston, TX 77076,

In trying to streamline various optimization functions, I would like to have a scratch pad of working data that is shared across a number of functions. These can be called from different levels within some wrapper functions for maximum likelihood and other such computations. I'm sure there are other applications that could benefit from this. Below are two approaches. One uses the <<-

Does R have a function like the S/S++ unset() function? unset(name) would remove 'name' from the current evaluation frame and return its value. It allowed you to safely avoid some memory copying when calling .C or .Call. E.g., suppose you had C code like #include <R.h> #include <Rinternals.h> SEXP add1(SEXP pX) { int nProtected = 0; int n = Rf_length(pX);

Hi, I am investigating a performance degradation between llvm-3.1 and llvm-3.2 (Note: current top-of-tree shows a similar degradation) One issue I see is the following: - 'loop invariant code motion' seems to be depending on the result of the 'reassociate expression' pass: In the samples below I observer the following behavior: Both start with the same expression: %add = add

Se ha borrado un texto insertado con un juego de caracteres sin especificar... Nombre: no disponible Url: https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/attachments/20070521/f7808713/attachment.pl

Shouldn't the F statistic (and p value) for the x2 term in the following calls to anova() and add1() be the same? I think anova() gets it right and add1() does not. > d <- data.frame(y=1:10, x1=log(1:10), x2=replace(1/(1:10), 2:3, NA)) > anova(lm(y ~ x1 + x2, data=d)) Analysis of Variance Table Response: y Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) x1 1

It's an interesting problem. The best stuff I've seen published is by Cooper, Eckhart, & Kennedy, in PACT '08. Cooper gives a nice intro in one of his lectures: http://www.cs.rice.edu/~keith/512/2012/Lectures/26ReassocII-1up.pdf I can't tell, quickly, what's going on in Reassociate; as usual, the documentation resolutely avoids giving any credit for the ideas. Why is that?

Reid wrote: > I have to agree with Misha on this. None of us knows "everything" about > LLVM and as you can see, Misha responded three hours before I did :). > Asking questions here is encouraged, so please feel free to post them on > LLVMdev. We'll always help where we can. well, OK :) Please find the attachment with the first approach to such an example i've

Valery, Attached are three files: "valery.cpp" which contains your original, "reid.cpp" which contains corrections to most of the FIXME items and "diffs" which shows the differences between them. The differences should be instructive on what to do. You were really, really close .. just a few details changing. The code in "reid.cpp" compiles but I