similar to: Loop on characters

John Ackermann N8UR via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> writes: > I am monitoring via the SNMP driver an APC SmartUPS that has split > phase (2L + neutral) 240V input and 120/120 volt outputs. The data > for the voltages is not what I'm expecting, and I am wondering how I > should interpret it. Wow, that sounds kind of industrial. Model? Is the

Hello, #I have two matrices, eg.: y <- matrix( c(20, NA, NA, 45, 50, 19, 32, 101, 10, 22, NA, NA, 80, 49, 61, 190), ncol=4 ) x <- matrix( c(20, NA, NA, NA, 50, 19, 32, 101, 10, 22, NA, NA, 80, 49, 61, 190), ncol=4 ) #Whereas x contains all NA?s from y plus some additional NA?s. #I want to find the index of these additional NA?s. I think, there must be a very

Hi, I am trying to create a dotplot where each panel shows levels vs. responses; the levels are sorted by responses but levels vary from one panel to another. However, I run into problems with controlling the y-limits and y-labels. In particular, suppose I have a data frame rsp <- c(10,2,4,0,2,3) lvl <-

I think that's incorrect. It should to: .section .foo .L1: .L2 = .L1 .section .bar .long .L3-.L2 .L3: Because .L3 and .L2 are in different sections. - Justin On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > This reduces to > > .section .foo > .L1: > .L2 = .L1 > .section .bar > .long .L1-.L2 > > > Which is fairly

Hello list, I am wondering if a joining "one-to-many" can be done a little bit easier. I tried merge function but I was not able to do it, so I end up using for and if. Suppose you have a table with locations, each location repeated several times, and some attributes at that location. The second table has the same locations, but only once with a different set of attributes. I would

Sounds pretty normal from what I see. It appears that this is *NOT* a true 240v UPS, but rather one that provides two legs of 120v output from two legs of 120 input, and what is seen as "L2" is actually neutral, and the line names are reporting incorrectly. With that in mind, each leg in should be 120v, as well as the outputs, which is exactly what you are seeing.(The fact tht L1 to L3

Thanks, Tim. The unit was available with single as well as split phase output, and from the data I can find the input was single phase, though the input connector has L1/L2/N/G wires. I'm digging through the MIB to see what the raw data looks like. Thanks! John ---- On 11/11/24 19:14, Tim Dawson wrote: > Sounds pretty normal from what I see. It appears that this is *NOT* a > true

Hi -- I am monitoring via the SNMP driver an APC SmartUPS that has split phase (2L + neutral) 240V input and 120/120 volt outputs. The data for the voltages is not what I'm expecting, and I am wondering how I should interpret it. Here is an example from upsc: input.L1-L2.voltage: 121 input.L2-L3.voltage: 120 input.voltage: 121.20 output.current: 5.90 output.L1-L2.voltage: 119

The following IR implements the following nested loop: for (int i = start ; i < end ; ++i ) for (int p = 0 ; p < 4 ; ++p ) a[i*4+p] = b[i*4+p] + c[i*4+p]; define void @main(i64 %arg0, i64 %arg1, i1 %arg2, i64 %arg3, float* noalias %arg4, float* noalias %arg5, float* noalias %arg6) { entrypoint: br i1 %arg2, label %L0, label %L1 L0:

Hello, I'm using the function nlminb of the package stats inside a loop and when the number of trials grows, R crashes and says "R GUI front-end has stopped working". Could you help me with this problem? I have try in versions 2.15.1,2.15.2 and 3.0.0. > sessionInfo() R version 2.15.2 (2012-10-26) Platform: i386-w64-mingw32/i386 (32-bit) locale: [1]

Hi, All, I am implementing real-time Rsync on Windows 2008 system. I set up Rsync server and Rsync client on two machines. An windows service is watching all the Windows file events with FileSystemWatcher. However, the service cannot tell the exactly what happened to folders such as create, delete, or modified. So, I ignored folder event, and only catch file changing events. After I catch

The loop vectorizer relies on cleanup passes to be run after it: from Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp: // Add the various vectorization passes and relevant cleanup passes for // them since we are no longer in the middle of the main scalar pipeline. MPM.add(createLoopVectorizePass(DisableUnrollLoops)); MPM.add(createInstructionCombiningPass());

I have a dataFrame variable: L1 L2 L3 ... v1 v2 ... 1 2 3 4 ... I want to process subsets of it as defined by combinations of L1-L2-L3. I do it successfully using nested loops: for (i in valuesOfL1 { for (j in valuesOfL2) { for (k in valuesOfL3) { tempData <- subset(dataFrame, (L1 == i & L2 == j & L3 == k, select=c(v1,v2) )) if

Hi LLVM developers, I want to add LICM pass after loop unrolling pass in current optimization pipeline. Because both of them are loop passes, so if I registered them one by one, they will interleaved go through all loops in bottom up way within same loop pass manager. Loop unroling pass may create new inner loops from partial unrolling, and those newly created loops can be visited only if the

The instcombine pass cleans up a lot. Any idea why there are still shufflevector, insertelement, *and* bitcast (!!) etc. instructions left? The original loop is so clean, a textbook example I'd say. There is no need to shuffle anything.At least I don't see it. Frank vector.ph: ; preds = %L5 %broadcast.splatinsert1 = insertelement <4 x

Hi, I have to recognize that i don't fully understand the aggregate function, but i think it should help me with what i want to do. xveg is a data.frame with location, species, and total for the species. Each location is repeated, once for every species present at that location. For each location i want to find out which species has the maximum total ... so i've tried different ways to

Hi all, I didn't get a response to my post of this issue a week ago, so I've tried to clarify: When I use lme to analyze a model of nested random effects, the variance estimates of levels higher in the hierarchy appear to have much more variance than they should. In the example below with 4 levels, I simulate variance in level 2 (sd=1.0) and level 4 (sd=0.1), but levels 1 and 3 do

Hi Hal, James told me that in PassManagerBuilder.cpp, BarrierNoopPass is already used for this kind of purpose(though there's also a fixme saying it's hacking). I think it's a good idea to use this pass here. Thanks, Kevin 2015-03-11 17:05 GMT+08:00 Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kevin Qin" <kevinqindev at

Hi, How does the requirement that phi instructions have one value per predecessor basic block interact with indirectbr instructions? For instance, take the following code: L1: br i1 %somevalue, label %L2, label %L3 L2: %ret1 = i8* blockaddress(@myfunction, %L5) br label %L4 L3: %ret2 = i8* blockaddress(@myfunction, %L6) br label %L4 L4: %ret = phi i8* [%ret1, L2], [%ret2, L3]

I get a segmentation fault when I access labelled three-dimensional arrays: > new.array<-array((1:27),c(3,3,3)) > new.array[,1,] [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 1 10 19 [2,] 2 11 20 [3,] 3 12 21 > label<-c("l1","l2","l3") > new.array<-array((1:27),c(3,3,3),list(label,label,label))