similar to: Alternatives to merge for large data sets?

Hello, I'm using a very large data set (n > 100,000 for 7 columns), for which I'm pretty happy dealing with pairwise-deleted correlations to populate my correlation table. E.g., a <- cor(cbind(col1, col2, col3),use="pairwise.complete.obs") ...however, I am interested in the number of cases used to compute each cell of the correlation table. I am unable to find such a

Hello, I'm doing some analysis on a rather large data set. In this case, some simple commands are failing. For example, this one: > x$eventtype <- factor(x$eventtype) Error in unique.default(x) : length 1093574297 is too large for hashing ...I think this is a bug, because "hashing" should not be required for the "factor" function. Am I right? The whole column

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Zvonimir Rakamaric <zrakamar at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks guys! > > I was looking into ModRef before, but I don't think that's exactly > what I need. ModRef API call getModRefInfo requires a Value to be > passed to it. However, some memory location M (which is a <DSNode, > offset> pair) visible to the caller can be modified

Thanks guys! I was looking into ModRef before, but I don't think that's exactly what I need. ModRef API call getModRefInfo requires a Value to be passed to it. However, some memory location M (which is a <DSNode, offset> pair) visible to the caller can be modified in the callee without any Value in the caller actually pointing to that location. I also need to capture those... I

On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:56:26PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > > On 01.11.2012, at 14:44, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > > Moving this thread to llvmdev. > > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:09:34PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> On Oct 30, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > >>>> Hi

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > > On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, ????????? (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > > >

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com>wrote: > > On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> > wrote: > > > Hi Pawel, > > > > PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory > > still sit in lib/Target in 3.2 release. Do you think update the > > release tarball is

On 6 December 2014 at 00:03, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > Reverted for now. Not sure what's going on there. Sorry for the breakage. No worries, at least that was easy to spot. Huzzah for buildbots! :) cheers, --renato

Sorry for speaking too soon. It is missing from 3.2 which is the version I have been using. If it is already implemented than it is very good news. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Eli Bendersky [mailto:eliben at google.com] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 9:25 AM To: Manny Ko Cc: Albert Graef; Benjamin Kramer; LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Removing old JIT

On 01.11.2012, at 14:44, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > Moving this thread to llvmdev. > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:09:34PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Oct 30, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: >>>> Hi Tom, >>>> >>>> Time is running short, but this would be great. The best place to

Hello, I have searched and failed for a program or script or method to conduct a power analysis for a MANOVA. My interest is a fairly simple case of 5 dependent variables and a single two-level categorical predictor (though the categories aren't balanced). If anybody happens to know of a script that will do this in R, I'd love to know of it! Otherwise, I'll see about writing one

On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > > > Hi Pawel, > > > > PTX already be replaced with NVPTX. However, PTX subdirectory > >

On 27.10.2012, at 18:24, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 27.10.2012, at 18:15, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > >> How does this affect freestanding implementations? > > This transform is disabled with -fno-builtin or -ffreestanding. Thinking a bit more about this, it looks like the way -ffreestanding is implemented in clang is

On 17.06.2013, at 15:56, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: > On 2013-06-15 16:39 , Benjamin Kramer wrote: >> Do you want to take over this effort or should I poke more at it? > > Since you've already started, it's easier if you poke more at it. Thanks. I've got a whole bunch of other things to go through. OK, will do. Jakob any comments on the

Hello, this is the mailing list anti-spam filter at Xiph.Org. We need you to confirm your e-mail message with the subject of "subscribe". Please send a message to the following address, or simply use your mailer's "Reply" feature. icecast+confirm+1076405509.4977.3d207b@xiph.org Rather than allow only list subscribers to post to Xiph.Org mailing lists,

Hi Ben, That did help. I continue to notice the virtual register in the program. I use LLVM 3.4. The program i am looking at is a very simple one. Listed below int global_var; int *global_ptr; int32_t main(int32_t argc, char ** argv){ int p = 10; int k = 20; int *pp; char *c_pp; pp = &k; global_ptr = pp; pp = &p; global_ptr = &global_var; return 0; } BR/Nizam

On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: >> >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer >>> <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 11.01.2013, at

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: > On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> > >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski > >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer

I keep getting these smarmy sermons from somebody's mail account. I include my response to it below, though from its message, it probably won't be read. Tim Conway tim.conway@philips.com 303.682.4917 Philips Semiconductor - Longmont TC 1880 Industrial Circle, Suite D Longmont, CO 80501 Available via SameTime Connect within Philips, n9hmg on AIM perl -e 'print pack(nnnnnnnnnnnn,

On Dec 31, 2012, at 11:57 AM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not entirely sure why this is the case, the target specific stuff for opt is still very new, but at the moment you have to explicitly set a triple for opt so it can access target-specific bits to estimate the cost of vectorization. I think that this is a good opportunity to discuss this topic. At