[japanese]Note: Loading .latex2html-init Error: No such image type ''. This installation supports (first is default):netpbm は入っているはずなのだが...
checking for ghostscript version... no Error: could not determine gs version Warning: Will not be able to generate images due to above failure. checking for pnmflip... /usr/bin/pnmflipとある.Ghostscript の設定が読み込めていない様子.config/config.plを手作業で変更してもよいが,とりあえずオプション付きでコンフギュアする.
./configure --prefix=/usr/local --with-gsdevice=pbm --enable-png
$ sudo rm /usr/local/bin/latex2html $ sudo rm -Rf /usr/local/lib/latex2html $ sudo rm -Rf /usr/local/bin/texexpand $ sudo rm -Rf /usr/local/share/lib/latex2htmlその他,(/usr/local/teTeX/share/texmf/tex/latex/html)以下にもいろいろインストールされているのだが,こっちはそのままにしておく.
checking for ghostscript library and font paths... no Warning: Could not determine GS_LIB path. Ghostscript may not work due to missing startup files. You need to set the value of GS_LIB manually in cfgcache.pm. Hint: Search for the file 'gs_init.ps'. This directory and the 'fonts' directory (usually same level) should be set in GS_LIB. Separate the entries with the ":" character. The current directory "." should be included, too. checking for /usr/bin/pnmcrop -verbose ... no checking for pnmcrop -verbose ... no checking for pnmcrop... /usr/bin/pnmcropそこでさらに次の修正を行った. config.pl で
$newcfg{'GS_LIB'} = '/usr/share/ghostscript/8.61'; if($gs) { # my @gs_devs; my @gs_lib_path; # my $gs_version; my @gs_devs=qw(pnmraw ppmraw); my $gs_version=8.61;さらに
# my $gs_lib = 0; # my $gs_fonts = 0; my $gs_lib = 1; my $gs_fonts = 1;と変える.自宅には netpbmも入っていなかった.つまりpnmcrop などがない.Synaptic で netpbmを入れて,実行すると成功して,/usr/loca/bin/latex2htmlが使えるようになった.
$ su Password: # perl -MCPAN -e 'install hoge::hoge' # とか # perl -MCPAN -e 'install hoge_module'なんて作業をした.
options(repos="http://cran.md.tsukuba.ac.jp")を実行してから,install.packages("hoge") として,何とかパッケージをインストールした.原因は何だろう.
...ほぼ同じ規模の町での発症の平均値は0.5人である.2人という数は0.5人に比較して有意に大きいと判断していいであろうか.帰無仮説は「この病気の発症は...どこでも無作為に起る」というものである..つまり発症は平均0.5のポアソン分布に従うと考えることになる.では,2以上の値を観測する確率はいくらだろうか?
for(i in 1:length(kekka)){ if(kekka[[i]][2] == "名詞"){ print(kekka[[i]]) } }こうした処理はベクトル単位で検索するRの方がCよりも早いんじゃないかな?
The subjective analysis of literary style is a highly developed art, but one which suffers from two limitations. The first is its essential subjectivity. A critic draws up a list of genuine works, using literary style as an important criterion in his judgement. Asked how he knows the work to be genuine, he can only reply, "I see in them the mind and style of the author and the external evidence agree with this judgement". If you the ask him how he knows the mind and style of the author he can only say, "I see them in the genuine works". So a large part, and it may be the decisive part, of his analysis is founded upon a circular argument.
ともあるしなぁ.Using C++ iostreams, as in this example, is best avoided. There is no guarantee that the output will appear in the R console, and indeed it will not on the R for Windows console. Use R code or the C entry points (see Section 5.5 [Printing], page 59) for all I/O if at all possible.
All R strings should be null-terminated, so strncpy will only copy the number of characters present (plus the null terminator) if less than n. Quite true; I'd forgotten strncpy stopped at null. I can see that writeChars might write rubbish out, but not why it should segfault. Ok, I've just had a poke at it with ddd. The above example faults in the memset() call (line 2772 connections.c) in both R versions. I think the problem is underallocation of buf:
len = 0; /* line 2757 */ for(i = 0; i < n; i++) { tlen = strlen(CHAR(STRING_ELT(object, i))); if (tlen > len) len = tlen; } buf = (char *) R_alloc(len + slen, sizeof(char));
which sets len to the longest string in object (in this case, 0 bytes), then allocates len+slen to buf. gdb confirms len=0 and slen=1 at this point. But a little later
len = INTEGER(nchars)[i]; /* line 2770 */ s = CHAR(STRING_ELT(object, i)); memset(buf, '\0', len + slen); strncpy(buf, s, len);
len is now set to [the first element of] nchars, which hasn't been checked, and is 10000000 (gdb confirms). So the call to memset() copies way over the end of allocated buf. Does that sound rational? I'm not very familiar with R's internals. I guess small overruns might not actually fault, because buf is within R's existing heap?
The notion that samples ought to be random is so firmly engrained in one's mind that it seems almost sacrilegious to object to the application of the rule in a particular case. But after all the problem surely is not whether a tract passing under the name Jones does or does not resemble, in this particular characteristics, a random sample from writings of Brown, but samples from Brown's writing dealing, so far as possible, with same sort of material in the same sort of way. The method of "selected samples" is, from this standpoint, entirely justified and perfectly correct.
PROGRAM p30_f90 IMPLICIT NONE REAL :: X,Y WRITE (*,*) 'X=' READ (*,*) X Y=((2.0*X+5.0)*X+3.0)*X+1.0 WRITE (*,*) 'Y=', Y STOP END PROGRAM p30_f90 $ gfortran -o p30 p30.f90
計量経済学やその周辺の学問体系は、マルクス経済学に由来する学び方の「輪読」や「レジメ」学習法からは何も得るものはないので注意してほしい。自分の手で実際に動かしてその仕組みを知る他はない。