[Rd] correct address for R-bugs ..
> "Greg" == Gregory Warnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > on Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:03:00 -0500 writes: Greg> I got an email error message when I attempted to Greg> send this from my work account. I have manually Greg> added it to the bug tracker, and am resending from Greg> my personal account. Greg> -G Greg> On 12/12/05, Warnes, Gregory R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: Warnes, Gregory R >> > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 1:53 PM >> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ^^^ Can you tell where you took this address from? We'd very much like that R bug reports be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (from where they are forwarded to the repository in Denmark, *after* having been virus- and spam-filtered). Martin Maechler, ETH ZUrich __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389)
Full_Name: Axel Rasche
Version: 2.2.0
OS: Linux
Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
Dear Debuggers,
This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny behaviour
rather than an error message.
In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical vector
as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns the
first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
Best regards,
Axel
Appendix:
b = c("a","b","c","d")
a = c(0,1,1,0)
b[as.logical(a)]
b[a]
a = c(1,0,1,0)
b[as.logical(a)]
b[a]
a = c(0,1,1,1)
b[as.logical(a)]
b[a]
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Full_Name: Axel Rasche
> Version: 2.2.0
> OS: Linux
> Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
>
>
> Dear Debuggers,
>
> This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
> vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny behaviour
> rather than an error message.
>
> In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical vector
> as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns the
> first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
Yes, that is completely as intended. Zeros in a numerical index vector
produce nothing and ones produce the first element. The documentation
could arguably be better on this point though.
> Best regards,
> Axel
>
>
> Appendix:
>
> b = c("a","b","c","d")
> a = c(0,1,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(1,0,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(0,1,1,1)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
>
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
--
O__ Peter Dalgaard Øster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B
c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K
(*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389) (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
Yes, 0/1 (numeric) are intended to be used as index vectors -- and they
have the semantics of numeric indices, which is that 0 elements in the
index are omitted from the result. This can be a very useful mode of
operation in many situations.
I was going to write "This is described in both the introduction to R,
and in the documentation for '['", except that I checked before I wrote
and was surprised to be unable to any discussion of zeros in indexing in
any of the first three places I looked:
(1) help page for '[' (There is discussion of zero indices here, but
only in the context of using matrices to index matrices, not in the
context of ordinary vector indices).
(2) Section 2.7 "Index vectors: selecting and modifying subsets of a
data set" in "An Introduction to R", which does say this about numeric
indices:
2. A vector of positive integral quantities. In
this case the values in the index vector must
lie in the set {1, 2, . . . , length(x)}
(This seems to commit the sin of not telling the whole truth.)
(3) Section 5.5 "Array Indexing. Subsections of an array" (In "An
Introduction to R")
Question for others: did I miss something obvious, or is this a
documentation deficiency that zeros in indices are not discussed in 3 of
some obvious first places to look?
If indeed this is a documentation deficiency, I'm happy to contribute
documentation patch, but I await other opinions before spending any time
on that.
-- Tony Plate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Full_Name: Axel Rasche
> Version: 2.2.0
> OS: Linux
> Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
>
>
> Dear Debuggers,
>
> This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
> vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny behaviour
> rather than an error message.
>
> In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical vector
> as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns the
> first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
>
> Best regards,
> Axel
>
>
> Appendix:
>
> b = c("a","b","c","d")
> a = c(0,1,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(1,0,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(0,1,1,1)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
>
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389)
Hi,
OK, no bug. I got stuck into to much indexing. Now I understand this
point definitely better.
Sorry for disturbing you,
Axel
Tony Plate wrote:
> Yes, 0/1 (numeric) are intended to be used as index vectors -- and they
> have the semantics of numeric indices, which is that 0 elements in the
> index are omitted from the result. This can be a very useful mode of
> operation in many situations.
>
> I was going to write "This is described in both the introduction to R,
> and in the documentation for '['", except that I checked before I wrote
> and was surprised to be unable to any discussion of zeros in indexing in
> any of the first three places I looked:
>
> (1) help page for '[' (There is discussion of zero indices here, but
> only in the context of using matrices to index matrices, not in the
> context of ordinary vector indices).
>
> (2) Section 2.7 "Index vectors: selecting and modifying subsets of a
> data set" in "An Introduction to R", which does say this about numeric
> indices:
> 2. A vector of positive integral quantities. In
>this case the values in the index vector must
>lie in the set {1, 2, . . . , length(x)}
> (This seems to commit the sin of not telling the whole truth.)
>
> (3) Section 5.5 "Array Indexing. Subsections of an array" (In "An
> Introduction to R")
>
> Question for others: did I miss something obvious, or is this a
> documentation deficiency that zeros in indices are not discussed in 3 of
> some obvious first places to look?
>
> If indeed this is a documentation deficiency, I'm happy to contribute
> documentation patch, but I await other opinions before spending any time
> on that.
>
> -- Tony Plate
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Full_Name: Axel Rasche
>> Version: 2.2.0
>> OS: Linux
>> Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
>>
>>
>> Dear Debuggers,
>>
>> This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as
>> index
>> vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny
>> behaviour
>> rather than an error message.
>>
>> In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A
>> logical vector
>> as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just
>> returns the
>> first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Axel
>>
>>
>> Appendix:
>>
>> b = c("a","b","c","d")
>> a = c(0,1,1,0)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>> a = c(1,0,1,0)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>> a = c(0,1,1,1)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>>
>> __
>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>
--
***
Dipl. Math. ETH Axel Rasche
Max-Planck-Institute for Molecular Genetics
Department Lehrach (Vertebrate Genomics)
Ihnestrasse 63-73
D-14195 Berlin-Dahlem
GERMANY
Tel. ++49-30-8413-1289
Fax ++49-30-8413-1380
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389)
It is peculiar behaviour on your part, but the developers do not find it
at all `funny'.
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Full_Name: Axel Rasche
> Version: 2.2.0
> OS: Linux
> Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
>
>
> Dear Debuggers,
>
> This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
> vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny behaviour
> rather than an error message.
They are, and in your example they work as documented. You have not even
told us what you think the bug is.
What happens in clearly stated in the R Language Definition and in all
good reference books on R.
> In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical vector
> as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns the
> first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
As it should.
>
> Best regards,
> Axel
>
>
> Appendix:
>
> b = c("a","b","c","d")
> a = c(0,1,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(1,0,1,0)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
> a = c(0,1,1,1)
> b[as.logical(a)]
> b[a]
--
Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UKFax: +44 1865 272595
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] R_PROFILE on Windows
Dear R-devel,
There seems to be a bug in the Startup section, regarding the
R_PROFILE environment variable in Windows. If not a bug in the Startup
itself, perhaps a bug in the documentation.
According to ?Startup:
Then R searches for the site-wide startup profile unless the
command line option '--no-site-file' was given. The name of this
file is taken from the value of the 'R_PROFILE' environment
variable. If this variable is unset, the default is
'$R_HOME/etc/Rprofile.site'
On Windows XP, I created a batch file with the following lines:
SET R_PROFILE="C:\fernando\R.profile"
"C:\progs\R-2.2.0\bin\Rgui.exe"
On c:\fernando\R.profile I had:
options(foo='bar')
Running the batch file I created I get, in R:
> options()$foo
NULL
>Sys.getenv("R_PROFILE")
R_PROFILE
"\"c:\\fernando\\R.profile\""
I've tried using slashes instead of backslashes
(fernando/R.profile), double blackslashes (fernando\\R.profile) but it
seems there's no way to make it work.
The only way I could manage to have R read the profile was
renaming R.profile to .Rprofile and starting R on the directory the
.Rprofile was located.
Is this really the intended behaviour? If so, what's the
correct way to specify the R_PROFILE variable and have R use it on
Windows?
Ps: I've tested it on R 2.2.0 and on r-devel r36675, on Windows
XP SP2. Sorry if this is a non-bug. I'm a poor linux user trying to
survive on Windows, so I might have overloooked something.
Thank you,
--
"Though this be randomness, yet there is structure in't."
Rosa, F.H.F.P
Instituto de Matemática e Estatística
Universidade de São Paulo
Fernando Henrique Ferraz P. da Rosa
http://www.feferraz.net
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389) (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
The other place its discussed is in 3.4.1 of the R Language Definition:
http://finzi.psych.upenn.edu/R/doc/manual/R-lang.html#Indexing-by-vectors
On 12/13/05, Tony Plate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, 0/1 (numeric) are intended to be used as index vectors -- and they
> have the semantics of numeric indices, which is that 0 elements in the
> index are omitted from the result. This can be a very useful mode of
> operation in many situations.
>
> I was going to write "This is described in both the introduction to R,
> and in the documentation for '['", except that I checked before I wrote
> and was surprised to be unable to any discussion of zeros in indexing in
> any of the first three places I looked:
>
> (1) help page for '[' (There is discussion of zero indices here, but
> only in the context of using matrices to index matrices, not in the
> context of ordinary vector indices).
>
> (2) Section 2.7 "Index vectors: selecting and modifying subsets of a
> data set" in "An Introduction to R", which does say this about numeric
> indices:
> 2. A vector of positive integral quantities. In
>this case the values in the index vector must
>lie in the set {1, 2, . . . , length(x)}
> (This seems to commit the sin of not telling the whole truth.)
>
> (3) Section 5.5 "Array Indexing. Subsections of an array" (In "An
> Introduction to R")
>
> Question for others: did I miss something obvious, or is this a
> documentation deficiency that zeros in indices are not discussed in 3 of
> some obvious first places to look?
>
> If indeed this is a documentation deficiency, I'm happy to contribute
> documentation patch, but I await other opinions before spending any time
> on that.
>
> -- Tony Plate
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Full_Name: Axel Rasche
> > Version: 2.2.0
> > OS: Linux
> > Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
> >
> >
> > Dear Debuggers,
> >
> > This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
> > vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny
> > behaviour
> > rather than an error message.
> >
> > In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical
> > vector
> > as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns
> > the
> > first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Axel
> >
> >
> > Appendix:
> >
> > b = c("a","b","c","d")
> > a = c(0,1,1,0)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> > a = c(1,0,1,0)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> > a = c(0,1,1,1)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> >
> > __
> > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >
>
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389) (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
The other place its discussed is in 3.4.1 of the R Language Definition:
http://finzi.psych.upenn.edu/R/doc/manual/R-lang.html#Indexing-by-vectors
On 12/13/05, Tony Plate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, 0/1 (numeric) are intended to be used as index vectors -- and they
> have the semantics of numeric indices, which is that 0 elements in the
> index are omitted from the result. This can be a very useful mode of
> operation in many situations.
>
> I was going to write "This is described in both the introduction to R,
> and in the documentation for '['", except that I checked before I wrote
> and was surprised to be unable to any discussion of zeros in indexing in
> any of the first three places I looked:
>
> (1) help page for '[' (There is discussion of zero indices here, but
> only in the context of using matrices to index matrices, not in the
> context of ordinary vector indices).
>
> (2) Section 2.7 "Index vectors: selecting and modifying subsets of a
> data set" in "An Introduction to R", which does say this about numeric
> indices:
> 2. A vector of positive integral quantities. In
>this case the values in the index vector must
>lie in the set {1, 2, . . . , length(x)}
> (This seems to commit the sin of not telling the whole truth.)
>
> (3) Section 5.5 "Array Indexing. Subsections of an array" (In "An
> Introduction to R")
>
> Question for others: did I miss something obvious, or is this a
> documentation deficiency that zeros in indices are not discussed in 3 of
> some obvious first places to look?
>
> If indeed this is a documentation deficiency, I'm happy to contribute
> documentation patch, but I await other opinions before spending any time
> on that.
>
> -- Tony Plate
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Full_Name: Axel Rasche
> > Version: 2.2.0
> > OS: Linux
> > Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
> >
> >
> > Dear Debuggers,
> >
> > This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as i=
ndex
> > vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny be=
haviour
> > rather than an error message.
> >
> > In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical=
vector
> > as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just retur=
ns the
> > first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Axel
> >
> >
> > Appendix:
> >
> > b =3D c("a","b","c","d")
> > a =3D c(0,1,1,0)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> > a =3D c(1,0,1,0)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> > a =3D c(0,1,1,1)
> > b[as.logical(a)]
> > b[a]
> >
> > __
> > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >
>
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] 0/1 vector for indexing leads to funny behaviour (PR#8389) (maybe a documentation deficiency?)
?"[" says
See Also:
'list', 'array', 'matrix'.
'[.data.frame' and '[.factor' for the behaviour when applied to
data.frame and factors.
'Syntax' for operator precedence, and the _R Language_ reference
manual about indexing details.
and the `indexing details' are indeed where it says they are.
This is not an introductory topic, and it makes sense to have the details
in only one place and refer to it. That help page is already over-loaded.
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Tony Plate wrote:
> Yes, 0/1 (numeric) are intended to be used as index vectors -- and they
> have the semantics of numeric indices, which is that 0 elements in the
> index are omitted from the result. This can be a very useful mode of
> operation in many situations.
>
> I was going to write "This is described in both the introduction to R,
> and in the documentation for '['", except that I checked before I wrote
> and was surprised to be unable to any discussion of zeros in indexing in
> any of the first three places I looked:
>
> (1) help page for '[' (There is discussion of zero indices here, but
> only in the context of using matrices to index matrices, not in the
> context of ordinary vector indices).
>
> (2) Section 2.7 "Index vectors: selecting and modifying subsets of a
> data set" in "An Introduction to R", which does say this about numeric
> indices:
> 2. A vector of positive integral quantities. In
>this case the values in the index vector must
>lie in the set {1, 2, . . . , length(x)}
> (This seems to commit the sin of not telling the whole truth.)
No. Zero is not a positive integer.
> (3) Section 5.5 "Array Indexing. Subsections of an array" (In "An
> Introduction to R")
>
> Question for others: did I miss something obvious, or is this a
> documentation deficiency that zeros in indices are not discussed in 3 of
> some obvious first places to look?
>
> If indeed this is a documentation deficiency, I'm happy to contribute
> documentation patch, but I await other opinions before spending any time
> on that.
>
> -- Tony Plate
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Full_Name: Axel Rasche
>> Version: 2.2.0
>> OS: Linux
>> Submission from: (NULL) (141.14.21.81)
>>
>>
>> Dear Debuggers,
>>
>> This is not a serious problem. Are 0/1 vectors intended to be used as index
>> vectors? If yes, there is a bug. If not, it leads just to some funny
>> behaviour
>> rather than an error message.
>>
>> In the appendix is some simple code to reproduce the problem. A logical
>> vector
>> as.logic(a) helps by indexing the vector b. The 0/1 vector a just returns the
>> first value "a". But as many times as there is a 1 in a.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Axel
>>
>>
>> Appendix:
>>
>> b = c("a","b","c","d")
>> a = c(0,1,1,0)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>> a = c(1,0,1,0)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>> a = c(0,1,1,1)
>> b[as.logical(a)]
>> b[a]
>>
>> __
>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>
> __
> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
>
--
Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UKFax: +44 1865 272595
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] R_PROFILE on Windows
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Fernando Henrique Ferraz P. da Rosa wrote:
>There seems to be a bug in the Startup section, regarding the
> R_PROFILE environment variable in Windows. If not a bug in the Startup
> itself, perhaps a bug in the documentation.
Nope, it works as documented, using exactly the same code as on Linux.
You do not tell us your shell here (so I presume it is XP's cmd.exe), but
you seem to have set R_PROFILE to a string enclosed in quotes (as the R
output shows). Try
RGui.exe R_PROFILE=C:/fernando/R.profile
I am in the same boat, and so I use tcsh/sh on Windows to be sure I
understand the quoting rules.
>According to ?Startup:
>
> Then R searches for the site-wide startup profile unless the
> command line option '--no-site-file' was given. The name of this
> file is taken from the value of the 'R_PROFILE' environment
> variable. If this variable is unset, the default is
> '$R_HOME/etc/Rprofile.site'
>
>On Windows XP, I created a batch file with the following lines:
>
>SET R_PROFILE="C:\fernando\R.profile"
>"C:\progs\R-2.2.0\bin\Rgui.exe"
>
>On c:\fernando\R.profile I had:
>
>options(foo='bar')
>
>Running the batch file I created I get, in R:
>
>> options()$foo
>NULL
>>Sys.getenv("R_PROFILE")
> R_PROFILE
>"\"c:\\fernando\\R.profile\""
^^ ^^
>
>I've tried using slashes instead of backslashes
> (fernando/R.profile), double blackslashes (fernando\\R.profile) but it
> seems there's no way to make it work.
>
>The only way I could manage to have R read the profile was
> renaming R.profile to .Rprofile and starting R on the directory the
> .Rprofile was located.
>
>Is this really the intended behaviour? If so, what's the
> correct way to specify the R_PROFILE variable and have R use it on
> Windows?
>
>Ps: I've tested it on R 2.2.0 and on r-devel r36675, on Windows
> XP SP2. Sorry if this is a non-bug. I'm a poor linux user trying to
> survive on Windows, so I might have overloooked something.
--
Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UKFax: +44 1865 272595
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] Building R with f2c - still needed?
Does anyone have a need to use f2c rather than a Fortran compiler to build R? It is yet one more thing to test, and as it only works on 32-bit platforms it is something that I will shortly no longer be able to test. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UKFax: +44 1865 272595 __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Building R with f2c - still needed?
Prof Brian Ripley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does anyone have a need to use f2c rather than a Fortran compiler to build > R? > > It is yet one more thing to test, and as it only works on 32-bit platforms > it is something that I will shortly no longer be able to test. The only candidate that I can think of is the PDA scene, which R has been just a little too hard to build for till now (Linux based Zaurus excepted). For those platforms you could be stuck with only a C/C++ compiler, but probably also without all the rest of the toolchain, so building will be a major headache anyway. -- O__ Peter Dalgaard Øster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Building R with f2c - still needed?
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 09:48:56PM +, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: > Does anyone have a need to use f2c rather than a Fortran compiler to build > R? We used f2c up until a few months ago as a last line of defence against crappy Fg77 code on m68k/arm (one or both, it changed at times). I'd be hesitant about throwing it out, but it is of course your call. Thanks, Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] R-beta on AIX5.2
I build R-beta on AIX5.2 is failed. make[3]: Entering directory `/home/nakama/Rbeta/R-beta/src/nmath' xlc_r -I. -I../../src/include -I../../src/include -I/usr/local/include -I/opt/freeware/include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -q64 -I/usr/local/include -I/opt/freeware/include -O2 -D_ALL_SOURCE -D_LINUX_SOURCE_COMPAT -c mlutils.c -o mlutils.o "nmath.h", line 50.9: 1506-213 (S) Macro name calloc cannot be redefined. "nmath.h", line 50.9: 1506-358 (I) "calloc" is defined on line 641 of /usr/include/stdlib.h. make[3]: *** [mlutils.o] Error 1 --- R-beta.orig/src/nmath/nmath.h 2005-10-06 19:25:25.0 +0900 +++ R-beta/src/nmath/nmath.h2005-12-13 19:33:59.0 +0900 @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ #define ML_NAN R_NaN void R_CheckUserInterrupt(void); +#undef calloc #define calloc R_chk_calloc #define free R_chk_free -- http://www.nakama.ne.jp, http://r.nakama.ne.jp e-mail : EIJI Nakama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] R-beta on AIX5.2
Thank you. To avoid error messages on other platforms, we will use #ifdef calloc # undef calloc #endif (and similarly for free for completeness). On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Ei-ji Nakama wrote: > I build R-beta on AIX5.2 is failed. > > make[3]: Entering directory > `/home/nakama/Rbeta/R-beta/src/nmath' > xlc_r -I. -I../../src/include -I../../src/include -I/usr/local/include > -I/opt/freeware/include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -q64 -I/usr/local/include > -I/opt/freeware/include -O2 -D_ALL_SOURCE -D_LINUX_SOURCE_COMPAT -c > mlutils.c -o mlutils.o > "nmath.h", line 50.9: 1506-213 (S) Macro name calloc cannot be > redefined. > "nmath.h", line 50.9: 1506-358 (I) "calloc" is defined on line 641 of > /usr/include/stdlib.h. > make[3]: *** [mlutils.o] Error 1 > > > --- R-beta.orig/src/nmath/nmath.h 2005-10-06 19:25:25.0 +0900 > +++ R-beta/src/nmath/nmath.h 2005-12-13 19:33:59.0 +0900 > @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ > #define ML_NANR_NaN > > void R_CheckUserInterrupt(void); > +#undef calloc > #define calloc R_chk_calloc > #define free R_chk_free > > > -- > http://www.nakama.ne.jp, http://r.nakama.ne.jp > e-mail : EIJI Nakama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > __ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > > -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UKFax: +44 1865 272595 __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
