similar to: Re gular Expression help

I am fairly new to R and would like help with the problem below. I am trying to sum and count several rows in the data frame yy below. All works well as in example 1. When I try to add the columns, with an NA in Q21, I get as NA as mySum. I would like NA to be treated as O, or igored. I wrote a function to try to count an NA element as 0, Example 3 function. It works with a few warnings,

I currently have a data frame whose rows correspond to each student and whose columns are different variables for the student, as shown below: Lastname Firstname CATALOG_NBR Email StudentID EMPLID Start 1 alastname afirstname 1213 *@uark.edu 10295236 # 12/2/2008 2 anotherlastname anotherfirstname 1213 **@uark.edu ## 10295236 9/3/2008 Xattempts Q1

Hello, I'm using the "sem" package to do a confirmatory factor analysis on data collected with a questionnaire. In the model, there is a unique factor G and 23 items. I would like to calculate the standardized residual variance of the observed variables. "Sem" only gives the residual variance with the "summary" function, or the standardized loadings with the

Hi, I have an ansterisk and a cisco 827-4v registered to a Gatekeeper. asterisk has two extensions: exten => 223,1,Dial,OH323/BYEXTENSION@827PD exten => 730,1,Dial(IAX/eduardo@10.0.11.103) (IAX are working well) When I try to call each other, gnugk shows a ARJ: ARJ|10.0.11.112:1720|223:dialedDigits|730:dialedDigits|false|resourceUnavailable I think this could be a codec

Hi Jean-Marc, Yes I confirm that we have done the same internal review on this patch. For 1), I agree that an explicit unit test would be a good plus to cover the cases that "make check" cannot trigger. If you like, we may submit an unit test patch for code review. Thanks, Linfeng On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:48 PM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > Hi Linfeng,

Hi Jean-Marc, (forgot cc opus@) Thanks for creating the unit test code. Attached is the updated optimization patch. On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > On 13/02/17 01:09 PM, Linfeng Zhang wrote: > > For 1), I agree that an explicit unit test would be a good plus to cover > > the cases that "make check" cannot

I rebased my previous 3 patches to the current master with minor changes. Patches 1 to 3 replace all my previous submitted patches. Patches 4 and 5 are new. Thanks, Linfeng Zhang