Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
> Hervé Pagès
> on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes:
> On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
>> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would
>> be more of a concern here than for something like switch().
> which is actually a primitive. So it seems that there is at least
> another way to go than 'dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...'
> Thanks, H.
>>
>> If that can't/won't be fixed, what about fixing the man page so it's
>> in sync with the current behavior?
>>
>> Thanks, H.
Being back from vacations,...
I agree that something should be done here, if not to the code than at
least to the man page.
For now, I'd like to look a bit longer into a possible change to the function.
Peter mentioned a NSE way to fix the problem and you mentioned switch().
Originally, stopifnot() was only a few lines of code and meant to be
"self-explaining" by just reading its definition, and I really would like
to not walk too much away from that original idea.
How did you (Herve) think to use switch() here?
>> On 05/03/2017 02:26 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>>> The first line of stopifnot is
>>>
>>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>>>
>>> which takes ALL arguments and forms a list of them. This implies
>>> evaluation, so explains the effect that you see.
>>>
>>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>>
>>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>>
>>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
>>>
>>> If you want to enforce the order of evaluation, there is always
>>>
>>> stopifnot(A) stopifnot(B)
>>>
>>> -pd
>>>
On 3 May 2017, at 02:50 , Hervé Pagès
wrote:
Hi,
It's surprising that stopifnot() keeps evaluating its arguments
after it reaches the first one that is not TRUE:
> stopifnot(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) Error: 3 == 5 is
not TRUE In addition: Warning message: In stopifnot(3 == 5,
as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) : NAs introduced by coercion to integer
range > a [1] 12
The details section in its man page actually suggests that it
should stop at the first non-TRUE argument:
‘stopifnot(A, B)’ is conceptually equivalent to
{ if(any(is.na(A)) || !all(A)) stop(...); if(any(is.na(B)) ||
!all(B)) stop(...) }
Best, H.
--
Hervé Pagès
Program in Computational Biology Division of Public Health
Sciences Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview
Ave. N, M1-B514 P.O. Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024
E-mail: hpa...@fredhutch.org Phone: (206) 667-5791 Fax: (206)
667-1319
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__stat.ethz.ch_mailman_listinfo_r-2Ddevel&d=DwIFaQ&c=eRAMFD45gAfqt84VtBcfhQ&r=BK7q3XeAvimeWdGbWY_wJYbW0WYiZvSXAJJKaaPhzWA&m=JwgKhKD2k-9Kedeh6pqu-A8x6UEV0INrcxcSGVGo3Tg&s=f7IKJIhpRNJMC3rZAkuI6-MTdL3GAKSV2wK0boFN5HY&e=
>>>
>>
> -- Hervé Pagès
> Program in Computational Biology Division of Public Health Sciences
> Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Ave. N,
> M1-B514 P.O. Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024
> E-mail: hpa...@fredhutch.org Phone: (206) 667-5791 Fax: (206)
> 667-1319
> __
> 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] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
Hello,
I am a new on this list, so I introduce myself very briefly:
my background is applied mathematics, more precisely scientific calculus
applied for modeling metabolic systems, I am author/maintainer of
few packages (Deriv, rmumps, arrApply).
Now, on the subject of this discussion, I must say that I don't really
understand
Peter's argument:
>>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>>
>>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>>
>>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
The first line of the current stopifnot()
n <- length(ll <- list(...))
already evaluates _all_ of the arguments
in the caller frame. So to do the same only
on a part of them (till the first FALSE or NA occurs)
cannot be more penalizing than the current version, right?
I attach here a slightly modified version called stopifnot_new()
which works in accordance with the man page and
where there are only two additional calls: parent.frame() and eval().
I don't think it can be considered as real performance penalty
as the same or bigger amount of (implicit) evaluations was
already done in the current version:
source("stopifnot_new.R")
stopifnot_new(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12)
Error: 3 == 5 is not TRUE
a
Error: object 'a' not found
Best,
Serguei.
Le 15/05/2017 à 10:39, Martin Maechler a écrit :
Hervé Pagès
on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes:
> On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
>> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would
>> be more of a concern here than for something like switch().
> which is actually a primitive. So it seems that there is at least
> another way to go than 'dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...'
> Thanks, H.
>>
>> If that can't/won't be fixed, what about fixing the man page so it's
>> in sync with the current behavior?
>>
>> Thanks, H.
Being back from vacations,...
I agree that something should be done here, if not to the code than at
least to the man page.
For now, I'd like to look a bit longer into a possible change to the function.
Peter mentioned a NSE way to fix the problem and you mentioned switch().
Originally, stopifnot() was only a few lines of code and meant to be
"self-explaining" by just reading its definition, and I really would like
to not walk too much away from that original idea.
How did you (Herve) think to use switch() here?
>> On 05/03/2017 02:26 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>>> The first line of stopifnot is
>>>
>>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>>>
>>> which takes ALL arguments and forms a list of them. This implies
>>> evaluation, so explains the effect that you see.
>>>
>>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>>
>>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>>
>>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
>>>
>>> If you want to enforce the order of evaluation, there is always
>>>
>>> stopifnot(A) stopifnot(B)
>>>
>>> -pd
>>>
On 3 May 2017, at 02:50 , Hervé Pagès
wrote:
Hi,
It's surprising that stopifnot() keeps evaluating its arguments
after it reaches the first one that is not TRUE:
> stopifnot(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) Error: 3 == 5 is
not TRUE In addition: Warning message: In stopifnot(3 == 5,
as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) : NAs introduced by coercion to integer
range > a [1] 12
The details section in its man page actually suggests that it
should stop at the first non-TRUE argument:
‘stopifnot(A, B)’ is conceptually equivalent to
{ if(any(is.na(A)) || !all(A)) stop(...); if(any(is.na(B)) ||
!all(B)) stop(...) }
Best, H.
--
Hervé Pagès
Program in Computational Biology Division of Public Health
Sciences Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview
Ave. N, M1-B514 P.O. Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024
E-mail: hpa...@fredhutch.org Phone: (206) 667-5791 Fax: (206)
667-1319
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__stat.ethz.ch_mailman_listinfo_r-2Ddevel&d=DwIFaQ&c=eRAMFD45gAfqt84VtBcfhQ&r=BK7q3XeAvimeWdGbWY_wJYbW0WYiZvSXAJJKaaPhzWA&m=JwgKhKD2k-9Kedeh6pqu-A8x6UEV0INrcxcSGVGo3Tg&s=f7IKJIhpRNJMC3rZAkuI6-MTdL3GAKSV2wK0boFN5
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
So, here is the code:
8<
stopifnot_new <- function (...)
{
mc <- match.call()
n <- length(mc)-1
if (n == 0L)
return(invisible())
Dparse <- function(call, cutoff = 60L) {
ch <- deparse(call, width.cutoff = cutoff)
if (length(ch) > 1L)
paste(ch[1L], "")
else ch
}
head <- function(x, n = 6L) x[seq_len(if (n < 0L) max(length(x) +
n, 0L) else min(n, length(x)))]
abbrev <- function(ae, n = 3L) paste(c(head(ae, n), if (length(ae) >
n) ""), collapse = "\n ")
pfr <- parent.frame()
for (i in 1L:n) {
cl.i <- mc[[i + 1L]]
r <- eval(cl.i, pfr)
if (!(is.logical(r) && !anyNA(r) && all(r))) {
msg <- if (is.call(cl.i) && identical(cl.i[[1]], quote(all.equal))
&&
(is.null(ni <- names(cl.i)) || length(cl.i) == 3L ||
length(cl.i <- cl.i[!nzchar(ni)]) == 3L))
sprintf(gettext("%s and %s are not equal:\n %s"),
Dparse(cl.i[[2]]), Dparse(cl.i[[3]]), abbrev(r))
else sprintf(ngettext(length(r), "%s is not TRUE", "%s are not all
TRUE"),
Dparse(cl.i))
stop(msg, call. = FALSE, domain = NA)
}
}
invisible()
}
8<
Best,
Serguei.
Le 15/05/2017 à 12:48, Serguei Sokol a écrit :
Hello,
I am a new on this list, so I introduce myself very briefly:
my background is applied mathematics, more precisely scientific calculus
applied for modeling metabolic systems, I am author/maintainer of
few packages (Deriv, rmumps, arrApply).
Now, on the subject of this discussion, I must say that I don't really
understand
Peter's argument:
>>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>>
>>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>>
>>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
The first line of the current stopifnot()
n <- length(ll <- list(...))
already evaluates _all_ of the arguments
in the caller frame. So to do the same only
on a part of them (till the first FALSE or NA occurs)
cannot be more penalizing than the current version, right?
I attach here a slightly modified version called stopifnot_new()
which works in accordance with the man page and
where there are only two additional calls: parent.frame() and eval().
I don't think it can be considered as real performance penalty
as the same or bigger amount of (implicit) evaluations was
already done in the current version:
source("stopifnot_new.R")
stopifnot_new(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12)
Error: 3 == 5 is not TRUE
a
Error: object 'a' not found
Best,
Serguei.
Le 15/05/2017 à 10:39, Martin Maechler a écrit :
Hervé Pagès
on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes:
> On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
>> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would
>> be more of a concern here than for something like switch().
> which is actually a primitive. So it seems that there is at least
> another way to go than 'dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...'
> Thanks, H.
>>
>> If that can't/won't be fixed, what about fixing the man page so it's
>> in sync with the current behavior?
>>
>> Thanks, H.
Being back from vacations,...
I agree that something should be done here, if not to the code than at
least to the man page.
For now, I'd like to look a bit longer into a possible change to the function.
Peter mentioned a NSE way to fix the problem and you mentioned switch().
Originally, stopifnot() was only a few lines of code and meant to be
"self-explaining" by just reading its definition, and I really would like
to not walk too much away from that original idea.
How did you (Herve) think to use switch() here?
>> On 05/03/2017 02:26 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>>> The first line of stopifnot is
>>>
>>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>>>
>>> which takes ALL arguments and forms a list of them. This implies
>>> evaluation, so explains the effect that you see.
>>>
>>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>>
>>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>>
>>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
>>>
>>> If you want to enforce the order of evaluation, there is always
>>>
>>> stopifnot(A) stopifnot(B)
>>>
>>> -pd
>>>
On 3 May 2017, at 02:50 , Hervé Pagès
wrote:
Hi,
It's surprising that stopifnot() keeps evaluating its arguments
aft
[Rd] Error messages in replayPlot()
I was wondering if there is something that can be done to improve
error messages when replaying a recorded plot. For example a graphics
device that is too small usually results in a helpful error message:
png(height = 100)
plot(1)
# Error in plot.new() : figure margins too large
dev.off()
However when this happens when replaying a recorded plot, the error
message is not so helpful.
myplot <- evaluate::evaluate("plot(1)")[[2]]
png(height = 100)
replayPlot(myplot)
# Error in replayPlot(x) : invalid graphics state
dev.off()
A more informative error message that hints at what exactly is invalid
about the graphics state would be very helpful in this case.
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
> Serguei Sokol
> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes:
> I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
> So, here is the code:
[... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to
the current source code which is in
https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
or its corresponding github mirror
https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
]
> Best,
> Serguei.
Yes, something like that seems even simpler than Peter's
suggestion...
It currently breaks 'make check' in the R sources,
specifically in tests/reg-tests-2.R (lines 6574 ff),
the new code now gives
> ## error messages from (C-level) evalList
> tst <- function(y) { stopifnot(is.numeric(y)); y+ 1 }
> try(tst())
Error in eval(cl.i, pfr) : argument "y" is missing, with no default
whereas previously it gave
Error in stopifnot(is.numeric(y)) :
argument "y" is missing, with no default
But I think that change (of call stack in such an error case) is
unavoidable and not a big problem.
--
I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
issue.
Martin
> Le 15/05/2017 à 12:48, Serguei Sokol a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am a new on this list, so I introduce myself very briefly:
>> my background is applied mathematics, more precisely scientific calculus
>> applied for modeling metabolic systems, I am author/maintainer of
>> few packages (Deriv, rmumps, arrApply).
>>
>> Now, on the subject of this discussion, I must say that I don't really
understand
>> Peter's argument:
>>
>> >>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>> >>>
>> >>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>> >>>
>> >>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>> >>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>> >>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
>> The first line of the current stopifnot()
>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>> already evaluates _all_ of the arguments
>> in the caller frame. So to do the same only
>> on a part of them (till the first FALSE or NA occurs)
>> cannot be more penalizing than the current version, right?
>>
>> I attach here a slightly modified version called stopifnot_new()
>> which works in accordance with the man page and
>> where there are only two additional calls: parent.frame() and eval().
>> I don't think it can be considered as real performance penalty
>> as the same or bigger amount of (implicit) evaluations was
>> already done in the current version:
>>
>>> source("stopifnot_new.R")
>>> stopifnot_new(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12)
>> Error: 3 == 5 is not TRUE
>>> a
>> Error: object 'a' not found
>>
>> Best,
>> Serguei.
>>
>>
>> Le 15/05/2017 à 10:39, Martin Maechler a écrit :
Hervé Pagès
on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes:
>>> > On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
>>> >> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would
>>> >> be more of a concern here than for something like switch().
>>>
>>> > which is actually a primitive. So it seems that there is at least
>>> > another way to go than 'dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...'
>>>
>>> > Thanks, H.
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >> If that can't/won't be fixed, what about fixing the man page so it's
>>> >> in sync with the current behavior?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks, H.
>>>
>>> Being back from vacations,...
>>> I agree that something should be done here, if not to the code than at
>>> least to the man page.
>>>
>>> For now, I'd like to look a bit longer into a possible change to the
function.
>>> Peter mentioned a NSE way to fix the problem and you mentioned switch().
>>>
>>> Originally, stopifnot() was only a few lines of code and meant to be
>>> "self-explaining" by just reading its definition, and I really would
like
>>> to not walk too much away from that original idea.
>>> How did you (Herve) think to use switch() here?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >> On 05/03/2017 02:26 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>>> >>> The first line of stopifnot is
>>> >>>
>>> >>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>>> >>>
>>> >>> which takes ALL arguments and forms a list of them. This implies
>>> >>> evaluation, so explains the effect that you see.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>>> >>>
>>> >>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>>> >>>
>>> >>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>>> >>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>>> >>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
I think Hervé's idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments
selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C.
I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if
dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this:
Stopifnot <- function(...)
{
n <- length(match.call()) - 1
for (i in 1:n)
{
nm <- as.name(paste0("..",i))
if (!eval(nm)) stop("not all true")
}
}
Stopifnot(2+2==4)
Stopifnot(2+2==5, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
Stopifnot(2+2==4, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
Stopifnot(T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,F,T)
> On 15 May 2017, at 15:37 , Martin Maechler wrote:
>
> I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
> issue.
--
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Office: A 4.23
Email: pd@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
Le 15/05/2017 à 15:37, Martin Maechler a écrit :
Serguei Sokol
on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes:
> I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
> So, here is the code:
[... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to
the current source code which is in
https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
or its corresponding github mirror
https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
]
> Best,
> Serguei.
Yes, something like that seems even simpler than Peter's
suggestion...
It currently breaks 'make check' in the R sources,
specifically in tests/reg-tests-2.R (lines 6574 ff),
the new code now gives
> ## error messages from (C-level) evalList
> tst <- function(y) { stopifnot(is.numeric(y)); y+ 1 }
> try(tst())
Error in eval(cl.i, pfr) : argument "y" is missing, with no default
whereas previously it gave
Error in stopifnot(is.numeric(y)) :
argument "y" is missing, with no default
But I think that change (of call stack in such an error case) is
unavoidable and not a big problem.
It can be avoided but at price of customizing error() and warning() calls with
something like:
wrn <- function(w) {w$call <- cl.i; warning(w)}
err <- function(e) {e$call <- cl.i; stop(e)}
...
tryCatch(r <- eval(cl.i, pfr), warning=wrn, error=err)
Serguei.
--
I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
issue.
Martin
> Le 15/05/2017 à 12:48, Serguei Sokol a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am a new on this list, so I introduce myself very briefly:
>> my background is applied mathematics, more precisely scientific calculus
>> applied for modeling metabolic systems, I am author/maintainer of
>> few packages (Deriv, rmumps, arrApply).
>>
>> Now, on the subject of this discussion, I must say that I don't really
understand
>> Peter's argument:
>>
>> >>> To do it differently, you would have to do something like
>> >>>
>> >>> dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...
>> >>>
>> >>> and then explicitly evaluate each argument in turn in the caller
>> >>> frame. This amount of nonstandard evaluation sounds like it would
>> >>> incur a performance penalty, which could be undesirable.
>> The first line of the current stopifnot()
>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>> already evaluates _all_ of the arguments
>> in the caller frame. So to do the same only
>> on a part of them (till the first FALSE or NA occurs)
>> cannot be more penalizing than the current version, right?
>>
>> I attach here a slightly modified version called stopifnot_new()
>> which works in accordance with the man page and
>> where there are only two additional calls: parent.frame() and eval().
>> I don't think it can be considered as real performance penalty
>> as the same or bigger amount of (implicit) evaluations was
>> already done in the current version:
>>
>>> source("stopifnot_new.R")
>>> stopifnot_new(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12)
>> Error: 3 == 5 is not TRUE
>>> a
>> Error: object 'a' not found
>>
>> Best,
>> Serguei.
>>
>>
>> Le 15/05/2017 à 10:39, Martin Maechler a écrit :
Hervé Pagès
on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes:
>>> > On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Hervé Pagès wrote:
>>> >> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would
>>> >> be more of a concern here than for something like switch().
>>>
>>> > which is actually a primitive. So it seems that there is at least
>>> > another way to go than 'dots <- match.call(expand.dots=FALSE)$...'
>>>
>>> > Thanks, H.
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >> If that can't/won't be fixed, what about fixing the man page so it's
>>> >> in sync with the current behavior?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks, H.
>>>
>>> Being back from vacations,...
>>> I agree that something should be done here, if not to the code than at
>>> least to the man page.
>>>
>>> For now, I'd like to look a bit longer into a possible change to the
function.
>>> Peter mentioned a NSE way to fix the problem and you mentioned
switch().
>>>
>>> Originally, stopifnot() was only a few lines of code and meant to be
>>> "self-explaining" by just reading its definition, and I really would
like
>>> to not walk too much away from that original idea.
>>> How did you (Herve) think to use switch() here?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >> On 05/03/2017 02:26 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>>> >>> The first line of stopifnot is
>>> >>>
>>> >>> n <- length(ll <- list(...))
>>> >>>
>>> >>> which takes ALL arguments and forms a list of them. This implies
>>> >>> evaluation, so explains the effect that you see.
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
> peter dalgaard
> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:28:42 +0200 writes:
> I think Hervé's idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments
selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C.
if he just meant that, then "yes, of course" (but not so interesting).
> I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if
dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this:
Something like this, yes, that's close to what Serguei Sokol had proposed
(and of course I *do* want to keep the current sophistication
of stopifnot(), so this is really too simple)
> Stopifnot <- function(...)
> {
> n <- length(match.call()) - 1
> for (i in 1:n)
> {
> nm <- as.name(paste0("..",i))
> if (!eval(nm)) stop("not all true")
> }
> }
> Stopifnot(2+2==4)
> Stopifnot(2+2==5, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
> Stopifnot(2+2==4, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
> Stopifnot(T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,F,T)
>> On 15 May 2017, at 15:37 , Martin Maechler
wrote:
>>
>> I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
>> issue.
> --
> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
> Phone: (+45)38153501
> Office: A 4.23
> Email: pd@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
However, it doesn't look much of a hassle to fuse my suggestion into the
current stopifnot: Basically, just use eval(as.name(paste0("..",i))) instead of
ll[[i]] and base the initial calculation of n on match.call() rather than on
list(...).
-pd
> On 15 May 2017, at 17:04 , Martin Maechler wrote:
>
>> peter dalgaard
>>on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:28:42 +0200 writes:
>
>> I think Hervé's idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments
>> selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from
>> C.
>
> if he just meant that, then "yes, of course" (but not so interesting).
>
>> I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if
>> dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this:
>
> Something like this, yes, that's close to what Serguei Sokol had proposed
> (and of course I *do* want to keep the current sophistication
> of stopifnot(), so this is really too simple)
>
>> Stopifnot <- function(...)
>> {
>> n <- length(match.call()) - 1
>> for (i in 1:n)
>> {
>> nm <- as.name(paste0("..",i))
>> if (!eval(nm)) stop("not all true")
>> }
>> }
>> Stopifnot(2+2==4)
>> Stopifnot(2+2==5, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
>> Stopifnot(2+2==4, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
>> Stopifnot(T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,F,T)
>
>
>>> On 15 May 2017, at 15:37 , Martin Maechler
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
>>> issue.
>
>> --
>> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
>> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
>> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
>> Phone: (+45)38153501
>> Office: A 4.23
>> Email: pd@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Office: A 4.23
Email: pd@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
> Serguei Sokol
> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:32:20 +0200 writes:
> Le 15/05/2017 à 15:37, Martin Maechler a écrit :
>>> Serguei Sokol
>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes:
>> > I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
>> > So, here is the code:
>>
>> [... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to
>> the current source code which is in
>> https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
>> or its corresponding github mirror
>> https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
>> ]
>>
>> > Best,
>> > Serguei.
>>
>> Yes, something like that seems even simpler than Peter's
>> suggestion...
>>
>> It currently breaks 'make check' in the R sources,
>> specifically in tests/reg-tests-2.R (lines 6574 ff),
>> the new code now gives
>>
>> > ## error messages from (C-level) evalList
>> > tst <- function(y) { stopifnot(is.numeric(y)); y+ 1 }
>> > try(tst())
>> Error in eval(cl.i, pfr) : argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>> whereas previously it gave
>>
>> Error in stopifnot(is.numeric(y)) :
>> argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>>
>> But I think that change (of call stack in such an error case) is
>> unavoidable and not a big problem.
> It can be avoided but at price of customizing error() and warning() calls
with something like:
> wrn <- function(w) {w$call <- cl.i; warning(w)}
> err <- function(e) {e$call <- cl.i; stop(e)}
> ...
> tryCatch(r <- eval(cl.i, pfr), warning=wrn, error=err)
> Serguei.
Well, a good idea, but the 'warning' case is more complicated
(and the above incorrect): I do want the warning there, but
_not_ return the warning, but rather, the result of eval() :
So this needs even more sophistication, using withCallingHandlers(.)
and maybe that really get's too sophisticated and no
more "readable" to 99.9% of the R users ... ?
I now do append my current version -- in case some may want to
comment or improve further.
Martin
stopifnot <- function(...)
{
penv <- parent.frame()
cl <- match.call(envir = penv)[-1]
Dparse <- function(call, cutoff = 60L) {
ch <- deparse(call, width.cutoff = cutoff)
if(length(ch) > 1L) paste(ch[1L], "") else ch
}
head <- function(x, n = 6L) ## basically utils:::head.default()
x[seq_len(if(n < 0L) max(length(x) + n, 0L) else min(n, length(x)))]
abbrev <- function(ae, n = 3L)
paste(c(head(ae, n), if(length(ae) > n) ""), collapse="\n ")
benv <- baseenv()
for (i in seq_along(cl)) {
cl.i <- cl[[i]]
## r <- eval(cl.i, envir = penv, enclos = benv)
## but with correct warn/err messages:
r <- withCallingHandlers(
tryCatch(eval(cl.i, envir = penv, enclos = benv),
error = function(e) { e$call <- cl.i; stop(e) }),
warning = function(w) { w$call <- cl.i; w })
if (!(is.logical(r) && !anyNA(r) && all(r))) {
msg <- ## special case for decently written 'all.equal(*)':
if(is.call(cl.i) && identical(cl.i[[1]], quote(all.equal)) &&
(is.null(ni <- names(cl.i)) || length(cl.i) == 3L ||
length(cl.i <- cl.i[!nzchar(ni)]) == 3L))
sprintf(gettext("%s and %s are not equal:\n %s"),
Dparse(cl.i[[2]]),
Dparse(cl.i[[3]]), abbrev(r))
else
sprintf(ngettext(length(r),
"%s is not TRUE",
"%s are not all TRUE"),
Dparse(cl.i))
stop(msg, call. = FALSE, domain = NA)
}
}
invisible()
}
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
[Rd] [bug] droplevels() also drop object attributes (comment…)
Hi,
Just reporting a small bug… not really a big deal, but I don’t think that is
intended: droplevels() also drops all object’s attributes.
Example:
> > test <- c("hello", "something", "hi")
> > test <- factor(test)
> > comment(test) <- "this is a test"
> > attr(test, "description") <- "this is another test"
> > attributes(test)
> $levels
> [1] "hello" "hi" "something"
>
> $class
> [1] "factor"
>
> $comment
> [1] "this is a test"
>
> $description
> [1] "this is another test"
>
> > test <- droplevels(test)
> > attributes(test)
> $levels
> [1] "hello" "hi" "something"
>
> $class
> [1] "factor"
Serge
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
Le 15/05/2017 à 17:44, Martin Maechler a écrit : ... So this needs even more sophistication, using withCallingHandlers(.) and maybe that really get's too sophisticated and no more "readable" to 99.9% of the R users ... ? I'd say the current version is of minimal sophistication to reach both the doc and test requirements. Serguei. __ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
This is getting pretty convoluted.
The current behavior is consistent with the description at the top of
the help page -- it does not promise to stop evaluation once the first
non-TRUE is found. That seems OK to me -- if you want sequencing you
can use
stopifnot(A)
stopifnot(B)
or
stopifnot(A && B)
I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn
case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than
twisting the code into knots.
Best,
luke
On Mon, 15 May 2017, Martin Maechler wrote:
Serguei Sokol
on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:32:20 +0200 writes:
> Le 15/05/2017 à 15:37, Martin Maechler a écrit :
>>> Serguei Sokol
>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes:
>> > I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
>> > So, here is the code:
>>
>> [... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to
>> the current source code which is in
>> https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
>> or its corresponding github mirror
>> https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R
>> ]
>>
>> > Best,
>> > Serguei.
>>
>> Yes, something like that seems even simpler than Peter's
>> suggestion...
>>
>> It currently breaks 'make check' in the R sources,
>> specifically in tests/reg-tests-2.R (lines 6574 ff),
>> the new code now gives
>>
>> > ## error messages from (C-level) evalList
>> > tst <- function(y) { stopifnot(is.numeric(y)); y+ 1 }
>> > try(tst())
>> Error in eval(cl.i, pfr) : argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>> whereas previously it gave
>>
>> Error in stopifnot(is.numeric(y)) :
>> argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>>
>> But I think that change (of call stack in such an error case) is
>> unavoidable and not a big problem.
> It can be avoided but at price of customizing error() and warning() calls
with something like:
> wrn <- function(w) {w$call <- cl.i; warning(w)}
> err <- function(e) {e$call <- cl.i; stop(e)}
> ...
> tryCatch(r <- eval(cl.i, pfr), warning=wrn, error=err)
> Serguei.
Well, a good idea, but the 'warning' case is more complicated
(and the above incorrect): I do want the warning there, but
_not_ return the warning, but rather, the result of eval() :
So this needs even more sophistication, using withCallingHandlers(.)
and maybe that really get's too sophisticated and no
more "readable" to 99.9% of the R users ... ?
I now do append my current version -- in case some may want to
comment or improve further.
Martin
--
Luke Tierney
Ralph E. Wareham Professor of Mathematical Sciences
University of Iowa Phone: 319-335-3386
Department of Statistics andFax: 319-335-3017
Actuarial Science
241 Schaeffer Hall email: luke-tier...@uiowa.edu
Iowa City, IA 52242 WWW: http://www.stat.uiowa.edu
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
Hi,
On 05/15/2017 10:41 AM, luke-tier...@uiowa.edu wrote:
This is getting pretty convoluted.
The current behavior is consistent with the description at the top of
the help page -- it does not promise to stop evaluation once the first
non-TRUE is found. That seems OK to me -- if you want sequencing you
can use
stopifnot(A)
stopifnot(B)
or
stopifnot(A && B)
My main use case for using stopifnot() is argument checking. In that
context, I like the conciseness of
stopifnot(
A,
B,
...
)
I think it's a common use case (and a pretty natural thing to do) to
order/organize the expressions in a way such that it only makes sense
to continue evaluating if all was OK so far e.g.
stopifnot(
is.numeric(x),
length(x) == 1,
is.na(x)
)
At least that's how things are organized in the stopifnot() calls that
accumulated in my code over the years. That's because I was convinced
that evaluation would stop at the first non-true expression (as
suggested by the man page). Until recently when I got a warning issued
by an expression located *after* the first non-true expression. This
was pretty unexpected/confusing!
If I can't rely on this "sequencing" feature, I guess I can always
do
stopifnot(A)
stopifnot(B)
...
but I loose the conciseness of calling stopifnot() only once.
I could also use
stopifnot(A && B && ...)
but then I loose the conciseness of the error message i.e. it's going
to be something like
Error: A && B && ... is not TRUE
which can be pretty long/noisy compared to the message that reports
only the 1st error.
Conciseness/readability of the single call to stopifnot() and
conciseness of the error message are the features that made me
adopt stopifnot() in the 1st place. If stopifnot() cannot be revisited
to do "sequencing" then that means I will need to revisit all my calls
to stopifnot().
I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn
case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than
twisting the code into knots.
Why not. Still better than the current situation. But only if that
semantic seems more useful to people. Would be sad if usefulness
of one semantic or the other was decided based on trickiness of
implementation.
Thanks,
H.
Best,
luke
On Mon, 15 May 2017, Martin Maechler wrote:
Serguei Sokol
on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:32:20 +0200 writes:
> Le 15/05/2017 à 15:37, Martin Maechler a écrit :
>>> Serguei Sokol
>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes:
>> > I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass.
>> > So, here is the code:
>>
>> [... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to
>> the current source code which is in
>>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__svn.r-2Dproject.org_R_trunk_src_library_base_R_stop.R&d=DwIFAw&c=eRAMFD45gAfqt84VtBcfhQ&r=BK7q3XeAvimeWdGbWY_wJYbW0WYiZvSXAJJKaaPhzWA&m=t9fJDOl9YG2zB-GF0wQXrXJTsW2jxTxMHE-qZfLGzHU&s=KGsvpXrXpHCFTdbLM9ci3sBNO9C3ocsgEqHMvZKvV9I&e=
>> or its corresponding github mirror
>>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_wch_r-2Dsource_blob_trunk_src_library_base_R_stop.R&d=DwIFAw&c=eRAMFD45gAfqt84VtBcfhQ&r=BK7q3XeAvimeWdGbWY_wJYbW0WYiZvSXAJJKaaPhzWA&m=t9fJDOl9YG2zB-GF0wQXrXJTsW2jxTxMHE-qZfLGzHU&s=7Z5bPVWdGPpY2KLnXQP6c-_8s86CpKe0ZYkCfqjfxY0&e=
>> ]
>>
>> > Best,
>> > Serguei.
>>
>> Yes, something like that seems even simpler than Peter's
>> suggestion...
>>
>> It currently breaks 'make check' in the R sources,
>> specifically in tests/reg-tests-2.R (lines 6574 ff),
>> the new code now gives
>>
>> > ## error messages from (C-level) evalList
>> > tst <- function(y) { stopifnot(is.numeric(y)); y+ 1 }
>> > try(tst())
>> Error in eval(cl.i, pfr) : argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>> whereas previously it gave
>>
>> Error in stopifnot(is.numeric(y)) :
>> argument "y" is missing, with no default
>>
>>
>> But I think that change (of call stack in such an error case) is
>> unavoidable and not a big problem.
> It can be avoided but at price of customizing error() and
warning() calls with something like:
> wrn <- function(w) {w$call <- cl.i; warning(w)}
> err <- function(e) {e$call <- cl.i; stop(e)}
> ...
> tryCatch(r <- eval(cl.i, pfr), warning=wrn, error=err)
> Serguei.
Well, a good idea, but the 'warning' case is more complicated
(and the above incorrect): I do want the warning there, but
_not_ return the warning, but rather, the result of eval() :
So this needs even more sophistication, using withCallingHandlers(.)
and maybe that really get's too sophisticated and no
more "readable" to 99.9% of the R users ... ?
I now do append my current version -- in case some may want to
comment or improve further.
Martin
--
Hervé Pagès
Program in Computational Biology
Division of Public Health Sciences
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
1100 Fairview Ave. N,
Re: [Rd] stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument
On 05/15/2017 07:28 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
I think Hervé's idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments
selectively, so can stopifnot().
Yep.
Thanks,
H.
But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C.
I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if
dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this:
Stopifnot <- function(...)
{
n <- length(match.call()) - 1
for (i in 1:n)
{
nm <- as.name(paste0("..",i))
if (!eval(nm)) stop("not all true")
}
}
Stopifnot(2+2==4)
Stopifnot(2+2==5, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
Stopifnot(2+2==4, print("Hey!!!") == "Hey!!!")
Stopifnot(T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,T,F,T)
On 15 May 2017, at 15:37 , Martin Maechler wrote:
I'm still curious about Hervé's idea on using switch() for the
issue.
--
Hervé Pagès
Program in Computational Biology
Division of Public Health Sciences
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
1100 Fairview Ave. N, M1-B514
P.O. Box 19024
Seattle, WA 98109-1024
E-mail: hpa...@fredhutch.org
Phone: (206) 667-5791
Fax:(206) 667-1319
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] Error messages in replayPlot()
Hi
The "figure margins too large" message is suppressed on replay because
that replay code is also played when resizing a graphics device (so if
it was printed to the console you could get millions of error messages
as you resized a window) - on replay, the message is drawn on the
graphics device instead (take a look at the PNG that your second example
creates), but that is not necessarily easy to access.
Paul
On 16/05/17 00:07, Jeroen Ooms wrote:
I was wondering if there is something that can be done to improve
error messages when replaying a recorded plot. For example a graphics
device that is too small usually results in a helpful error message:
png(height = 100)
plot(1)
# Error in plot.new() : figure margins too large
dev.off()
However when this happens when replaying a recorded plot, the error
message is not so helpful.
myplot <- evaluate::evaluate("plot(1)")[[2]]
png(height = 100)
replayPlot(myplot)
# Error in replayPlot(x) : invalid graphics state
dev.off()
A more informative error message that hints at what exactly is invalid
about the graphics state would be very helpful in this case.
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
--
Dr Paul Murrell
Department of Statistics
The University of Auckland
Private Bag 92019
Auckland
New Zealand
64 9 3737599 x85392
p...@stat.auckland.ac.nz
http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~paul/
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
