Wrong list: Mac-specific question to R-sig-mac please.
On 03/09/2014 06:35, Xiao He wrote:
Hi all,
I tried to load a package which includes a shared object on one of my Macs,
and I got an error message below, which suggests that the file "
libquadmath.0.dylib" is missing in the /usr/local/lib f
On 02/09/2014 22:43, Ben Bolker wrote:
On 14-09-02 08:48 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
peter dalgaard
on Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:43:21 +0200 writes:
> Impressive. Never ceases to amaze me what computers can do these days.
;-)
Indeed,
> It's even more impressive given that we have
Hi all,
I tried to load a package which includes a shared object on one of my Macs,
and I got an error message below, which suggests that the file "
libquadmath.0.dylib" is missing in the /usr/local/lib folder. On my other
Mac however, I have no problem loading the package, and the file "
libquadm
On 14-09-02 08:48 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
>> peter dalgaard
>> on Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:43:21 +0200 writes:
>
> > Impressive. Never ceases to amaze me what computers can do these days.
> ;-)
>
> Indeed,
>
> > It's even more impressive given that we have
>
>
> > static
On 02 Sep 2014, at 14:21 , Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> I suspect PD knows (or has known) why, but for the sake of those who are not
> much bitten by ix86 compilers
>
> It's the curse of extended-precision arithmetic (and not enough registers).
> It does
Let's say that he suspected
> peter dalgaard
> on Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:43:21 +0200 writes:
> Impressive. Never ceases to amaze me what computers can do these days. ;-)
Indeed,
> It's even more impressive given that we have
> static double logbase(double x, double base)
> {
> #ifdef HAVE_LOG
On 02/09/2014 12:43, peter dalgaard wrote:
Impressive. Never ceases to amaze me what computers can do these days. ;-)
It's even more impressive given that we have
static double logbase(double x, double base)
{
#ifdef HAVE_LOG10
if(base == 10) return x > 0 ? log10(x) : x < 0 ? R_NaN : R_Neg
Impressive. Never ceases to amaze me what computers can do these days. ;-)
It's even more impressive given that we have
static double logbase(double x, double base)
{
#ifdef HAVE_LOG10
if(base == 10) return x > 0 ? log10(x) : x < 0 ? R_NaN : R_NegInf;
#endif
#ifdef HAVE_LOG2
if(base == 2)
Hi,
while working with closures in deSolve we have found unexpected behavior
in R 3.1.0 and R 3.1.1 and R devel, while it was still as expected in R
3.0.3. This behavior occurs also in several functions of other packages
like nls.lm from minpack.lm and even nlm in base, while some other
functions
