s4 | Simple Shamir 's Secret Sharing | Cryptography library

You could use vapply to do this (assuming you want a vector of integers):

We could match either a regex lookaround to match the lower case letters ((?<=[a-z])) followed by either one or more space, comma ([, ]+) followed by any / and digits (\\d+) and other characters (.*) or (|) one or more digits and other characters and replace with blank ("")

Use syscall function code 3 to print doubles (not function code 2 — that's for single float).

Use mov.d to copy one register to another, e.g. into $f12 for sycalls (then no need to load 0.0 into $f0).

(Also, use l.d instead of ldc1.)

The loop: loop isn't a loop (there is no backward branch for it).

As @Peter says, your scaling/offsets are not properly accounting for the size of double, which is 8.  Scaling needs to multiply by 8 (shift by 3, not 2), and offsets need to be multiples of 8.

Your first loop, when its done, should not EXIT the program but rather continue with the next statement (i.e. the printing loop).

For this statement numbers[i+2] = numbers[i+1] + numbers[i]; there are two loads and one store as array references, whereas the assembly code is doing 3 loads and no store.

You use $s5, but never put anything in it.

The comparison of numbers[i+1] < 150 has to be done in (double) floating point, whereas the assembly code is attempting this in integer registers.

Floating point comparison is done using c.eq.d, c.lt.d, or c.le.d.  Like with integer compares, constants need to be in registers before the compare instruction.  150.0 would best come directly from memory (as a double constant) before the loop and remain there for the loop duration (or you can move integer 150 into a floating point register and convert that to double (cvt.w.d)).

Conditional branches on floating point compare conditions use either bc1t or bc1f (depending on the sense you want).

The C-like pseudo code probably doesn't run properly.  The exit condition for the first loop is suspect — it will probably run off the end of the array (depending on its initial data values).

Translating non-working C code into assembly is a recipe for frustration.  Suggest getting it working in C first; run it to make sure it works.

packaged_task needs to be able to call SumUp::operator() so that needs to be public not private:

dieveed, it's best if you provide your data with R's dput function.

The way to do this in the tidyverse would be something like this:

globals() will work, if you use it the right way:

The simplest solution, I believe, would be:

Range.Find function returns:

A Range object that represents the first cell where that information is found

You are comparing the Value object of type variant to an object of type Range. Change your code to:

Try with groupby ngroup + 1, use sort=False to ensure groups are enumerated in the order they appear in the DataFrame: