Re: [R-pkg-devel] NOTE regarding dependencies in R code: Missing or unexported object

2018-04-21 Thread Rune Haubo
I don't think 'summary' is actually exported by lmerTest (version >=  3.0-0):

library(lmerTest)
fm <- lmer(Informed.liking ~ Gender + Information * Product + (1 | Consumer) +
 (1 | Consumer:Product), data=ham)
lmerTest::summary(fm) # gives: Error: 'summary' is not an exported
object from 'namespace:lmerTest'

On the other hand

summary(fm)

works just fine. lmerTest defines the S3 method 'summary' for
'lmerModLmerTest' objects, so if you change  sx <-
lmerTest::summary(x)  to  sx <- summary(x) you should be fine assuming
that x is of class 'lmerModLmerTest'.

For more details see
https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-sig-mixed-models/2018q1/026596.html
and perhaps 
https://github.com/runehaubo/lmerTestR/blob/master/pkg_notes/new_lmerTest.pdf
(which you were also pointed to previously).

Best regards
Rune


On 20 April 2018 at 21:53, David Hervás via R-package-devel
 wrote:
> __
> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "David Hervás" 
> To: "r-package-devel@r-project.org" 
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 19:53:50 + (UTC)
> Subject: NOTE regarding dependencies in R code: Missing or unexported object
> Hi,
> I have sent my package "clickR" to CRAN and was asked to fix the following 
> NOTE:
> * checking dependencies in R code ... NOTE
> Missing or unexported object: 'lmerTest::summary'
> I'm not sure what's going on, here is the Imports section of my DESCRIPTION 
> file:
> Imports: beeswarm, boot, lme4, lmerTest, methods, ReporteRs, xtable
>
>
>
> Here are the first lines of the function causing this NOTE:
> report.merModLmerTest<-function(x, file=NULL, type="word", digits=3, 
> digitspvals=3,
> font=ifelse(Sys.info()["sysname"] == "Windows", "Arial",  
>   "Helvetica")[[1]], pointsize=11, info=TRUE, ...){  sx 
> <- lmerTest::summary(x)  cor <- as.data.frame(lme4::VarCorr(x))  ...
>
> And here is the output from getNamespaceExports("lmerTest") where "summary" 
> is listed at position [23]
>
>  [1] "lmer"   "lsmeansLT"  
> ".__T__is.infinite:base" [4] ".__T__as.integer:base"  ".__T__as.numeric:base" 
>  ".__T__%*%:base" [7] ".__T__dim:base" ".__T__summary:base"   
>   ".__T__$<-:base"[10] ".__T__^:base"   ".__T__sum:base"  
>".__T__rep:base"[13] ".__T__*:base"   ".__T__[<-:base" 
> ".__T__as.logical:base" [16] ".__T__dimnames:base"".__T__%/%:base"
>  ".__T__prod:base"   [19] ".__T__[[<-:base"".__T__/:base" 
>   "step"  [22] "calcSatterth"   "summary" 
>".__T__anova:stats" [25] ".__T__is.finite:base"   
> ".__T__anyNA:base"   ".__T__!:base"  [28] ".__T__all:base"
>  ".__T__+:base"   ".__T__any:base"[31] ".__T__dim<-:base" 
>   ".__T__-:base"   ".__T__[:base"  [34] "anova"   
>"difflsmeans""lsmeans"   [37] "rand"   
> ".__C__merModLmerTest"   ".__T__length:base" [40] ".__T__is.na:base"  
>  ".__T__dimnames<-:base"  ".__T__&:base"  [43] ".__T__%%:base"
>   ".__T__$:base"

This seems to be from an older version of lmerTest.
>
>
> I have tried to reproduce this problem in my computer with different versions 
> of R (3.4.4, 3.5 RC and R-devel) and only get the NOTE when performing the 
> check with R-devel.

Have you checked that you are using a recent version of lmerTest with
3.4.4 and 3.5 RC? I think that might explain the diff.

> What should I do to fix this?
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
>

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel


Re: [R-pkg-devel] How do I know if/when my package is fit for CRAN?

2018-06-07 Thread Rune Haubo
On 7 June 2018 at 13:00, Michael Dewey  wrote:
>
> One thing which occurs to me though is whether the maintaner of lmerTest
> would accept it into the package? If it has a different philosophy probably
> not but perhaps worth asking?

In the lmerTest-team we are always open to collaborations. A quick
look at buildmer indicates that it takes a different approach than
lmerTest and has a different scope (lmerTest is for LMMs but buildmer
seems to cover GLMs, GLMMs, and GAMMs as well) so perhaps buildmer is
most appropriately kept in a separate package.

@Cesko, you may have noticed that a new almost completely re-written
version of lmerTest (>= 3.0.0) has been out for a couple of months
now? It has a new improved version of step() which should be better
behaved when it comes to convergence failures. If you still encounter
problems please let us know by posting an issue at
https://github.com/runehaubo/lmerTestR. In any case you are always
welcome to reach out privately.

Cheers

Rune
(for the lmerTest authors)

__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel