similar to: lmer question

Hi,I've been trying to code through CommandLine the options I want my tool accepts, but I find quite impossible to achieve robustly what I need .Look, I want the tool accepts a list of arguments in a particular order. For this goal, I know the cl::Positional flag. But, the problem is that the first argument must be one of a set of options (like a kind of subcommand of the tool). In my case,

On 05/06/2017 06:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 02:31:49PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > > On 04/27/2017 07:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:03:34AM +0000, Wang, Wei W wrote: > > > > Hi Michael, could you please give some feedback? > > > I'm sorry, I'm not sure feedback on what you are

On 05/06/2017 06:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 02:31:49PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > > On 04/27/2017 07:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:03:34AM +0000, Wang, Wei W wrote: > > > > Hi Michael, could you please give some feedback? > > > I'm sorry, I'm not sure feedback on what you are

Hi - I am not an expert at shell script writing. If /proc/cmdline looks like option1 option2 ... ks=http://192.168.1.8/ks/ks.cfg option3 option 4 ... How can I get the 192.168.1.8 out of this cmdline. THanks, Jerry

I am trying to set up an auto attendant for the first time, and am having trouble getting to the submenu. My extensions.conf file looks like this: [incoming] exten=> s,1,Background,menu1 exten=> s,2,Wait,20 exten=> s,3,Goto,s|1 exten=> 1,1,Playback,option1 exten=> 2,1,Playback,option2 exten=> 3,1,Playback,option3 It is my understanding that asterisk treats the digits entered

> library(MASS) > attach(bacteria) > table(y) y n y 43 177 > y<-1*(y=="y") > table(y,trt) trt y placebo drug drug+ 0 12 18 13 1 84 44 49 > library(lme4) > model1<-lmer(y~trt+(week|ID),family=binomial,method="PQL") Error in match.arg(method, c("Laplace", "AGQ")) : 'arg' should be one of

Hi all. I was wondering if anyone had a successful exampel of using the "add printer command" with cups so that the windows print migrator could be utilised. Seeing as Jerry as spent time on this it would be a shame not to know how to use it. ;-) I'm guessing that it would be along the lines of: add printer command = lpadmin option1 option2 && cupsaddsmb option1 but

Hello, I just downloaded the MareyMap: an R-based tool and followed the instructions: Option1: Click "Packages-Install package(s) from local zip files", it showed the followed error messages: > utils:::menuInstallLocal() Error in read.dcf(file.path(pkgname, "DESCRIPTION"), c("Package", "Type")) : cannot open the connection In addition: Warning

I recently discovered that multi-line RUN statements can actually be interrupted with non-RUN lines, without changing the behaviour. In other words, you can do something like: # RUN: some command --option1 \ ## Comment # CHECK: check something # RUN: --option2 And you'd end up with "some command --option1 --option2" being run. It's rather surprising behaviour, and not one

Hi Daniel, I would like to go deeper with CommandLine and I was asking if you could help me again. Look, following the same example you put in the last message: ./prog <option1> | ( <option2> --arg1 --arg2) | ( <option3> --arg1 ) What I really really want is the same except I don't want the "--" prefix is present in any of the arguments. ./prog <option1>

Hi Daniel, Just in the moment you replied my message, I was rewriting it as I hadn't noticed it hadn't a correct format. Sorry for that and thanks for answering it anyway. > ./prog <option1> | ( <option2> --arg1 --arg2) | ( <option3> --arg1 ) > Yes, that is exactly what I need. It's a pity commandLine doesn't implement that possibility. So I will do what

On 10 May 2013 09:44, Pedro Delgado Perez <pedro.delgadoperez at mail.uca.es> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I would like to go deeper with CommandLine and I was asking if you could > help me again. > > Look, following the same example you put in the last message: > > ./prog <option1> | ( <option2> --arg1 --arg2) | ( <option3> --arg1 ) > > What I

Hi Daniel, Thanks for your answer. > I am considering fixing the bug in the LLVM CommandLine library but is > going to be a long time before I can look at it. So don't wait for me > to do that. > Ok, ok, but, if you end up fixing this, please keep me post. > If you are really desperate to have the command line options in the > way you want they you may need to implement

Hi, I've been trying to code through CommandLine the options I want my tool accepts, but I find find quite impossible to achieve robustly what I need. Look, I want the tool accepts a list of arguments in a particular order. For this goal, I know the cl::Positional flag. But, the problem is that the first argument must be one of a set of options. In my case, only the three next commands are

There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example, they check debug info. Adding // FIXME: comments shift that. If the goal is easy identification of auto-inserted -allow-unused-prefixes directives, how about: - we make the flag an enum: true, false, and auto_inserted - we use

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have > output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example, > they check debug info. Adding

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 01:03 James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk> wrote: > I don't know if lit's parser is up to this (I suspect it isn't), but could > you add a comment to the end/in the middle of a RUN? Something like `# RUN: > do some thing | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=UNUSED --allow-unused-prefixes > ## FIXME? That would avoid changing the line

Hello I have a problem when fitting a mixed generalised linear model with the lmer-function in the Matrix package, version 0.98-7. I have a respons variable (sfox) that is 1 or 0, whether a roe deer fawn is killed or not by red fox. This is expected to be related to e.g. the density of red fox (roefoxratio) or other variables. In addition, we account for family effects by adding the mother

My preference would be to go with the tri-value option - I think the downside of folks needing to write a value after "-allow-unused-prefixes" is not that terrible; if folks feel that using true/false/auto is weird, how about "allowed/disallowed/script_allowed" or something like that. I'd argue that the value here is getting to the place where the default is right (so we