Dear expRts,
I just realized that the "..." argument in a function cannot be used without
taking precautions sometimes. The following behaviour is what I stumbled
upon:
> myrepl <- function(length, fun, ...) {
+ replicate(length, fun(...))}
> myrepl(20, sample, 1:5)
[1] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> myotherrepl <- function(length, fun, ...) {
+ args <- list(...)
+ replicate(length, do.call(fun, args))}
> myotherrepl(20, sample, 1:5)
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9] [,10] [,11] [,12] [,13] [,14]
[1,] 1 2 3 4 3 1 5 4 1 3 1 1 5 2
[2,] 5 4 1 1 1 2 4 3 5 4 2 3 4 3
[3,] 3 3 2 2 2 5 2 5 2 2 5 2 3 5
[4,] 4 5 5 3 5 4 1 1 3 5 4 4 1 4
[5,] 2 1 4 5 4 3 3 2 4 1 3 5 2 1
[,15] [,16] [,17] [,18] [,19] [,20]
[1,] 4 5 1 2 5 5
[2,] 2 1 4 1 1 4
[3,] 3 3 2 3 3 3
[4,] 1 4 3 5 4 2
[5,] 5 2 5 4 2 1
>
Is the necessity to protect "..." unique to replicate(), or have I been
(or am I still) missing something basic here?
Best wishes
Johannes
--
Johannes H�sing There is something fascinating about science.
One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] from such a trifling investment of fact.
http://derwisch.wikidot.com (Mark Twain, "Life on the Mississippi")
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
