Our preference is F77 compilers over F9x ones, as the lists Simon showed
reflects - we decided to prefer F95 to F90 in future, though.
My experience is that g77 from gcc-3.4.x is preferable to gfortran.
As I said earlier, once gcc-4.0.1 is released (and so R builds with a
released version of gcc
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 22:42 -0400, Simon Urbanek wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Marc Schwartz wrote:
>
> > Interesting. Did you do anything different on the ./configure line?
> >
> > $ ls -l /usr/bin/f95
> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Jun 13 21:18 /usr/bin/f95 -> gfortran
> >
> > I just tri
For completeness, I also just tried the R 2.1.1 snapshot from yesterday with
gcc-4.0, g++-4.0 and gfortran-4.0 in an up-to-date Debian unstable chroot --
no issues to report from the build and regression test.
Haven't run that version as I currently do not have a system running
unstable, though.
On Jun 14, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Marc Schwartz wrote:
> Interesting. Did you do anything different on the ./configure line?
>
> $ ls -l /usr/bin/f95
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Jun 13 21:18 /usr/bin/f95 -> gfortran
>
> I just tried it again (having installed some FC updates) and I
> still get g77..
As a biologist, I have been following this thread with interest.
I don't understand how someone can truly peer-review any software
without access to the source. Surely R is the only major environment
for statistical programming that _can_ be peer-reviewed in that
sense. (The BUGS project is hea
On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 00:01 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> Marc Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Prof. Ripley,
> >
> > If my read of the config.log is correct, it would appear that g77 was
> > used and not gfortran (which is installed):
> >
> > ...
> > C compiler:gcc
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 23:52 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> Marc Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14:57 +0100, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> > > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> > >
> > > > The next version of R will be released (barring force majeure) on J
Marc Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Prof. Ripley,
>
> If my read of the config.log is correct, it would appear that g77 was
> used and not gfortran (which is installed):
>
> ...
> C compiler:gcc -g -O2
> C++ compiler: g++ -g -O2
> Fortran compiler:
Marc Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14:57 +0100, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
> >
> > > The next version of R will be released (barring force majeure) on June
> > > 20th, with beta versions available starting Monday.
> > >
>
Prof. Ripley,
If my read of the config.log is correct, it would appear that g77 was
used and not gfortran (which is installed):
...
C compiler:gcc -g -O2
C++ compiler: g++ -g -O2
Fortran compiler: g77 -g -O2
...
$ g77 --version
GNU Fortran (GCC 3.2
Marc,
Thanks for the confirmation. Is this using gfortran too? A date of
20050519 should be after the show-stopper bug was fixed, but I am waiting
for 4.0.1 to be released (imminent) before doing more tests with gcc4.
Brian
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Marc Schwartz wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14
anova() is a generic function in R, and not implicated here: do read the
error message which pinpoints anova.lme, part of package nlme.
The FAQ asks only package maintainers to use R-bugs for contributed
packages such as nlme. Please do read it.
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
Hi,
I am working with R version 2.1.0, and I seem to have run into a bug. I get
the same bug when I run R on Windows as well as when I run it on Linux.
When I call anova to do a LR test from inside a function, I get an error.
The same call works outside of a function. I have provided the code b
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14:57 +0100, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
>
> > The next version of R will be released (barring force majeure) on June
> > 20th, with beta versions available starting Monday.
> >
> > Please do check them on your system *before* the rel
The C wrappers are there to align the linking conventions expected by the
Fortran compiler (usually subroutine/function foo has its entry point in the
object file indicated by a symbol foo_, but it depends on the platform) to
that of the C compiler. (The C compiler just uses the function name.) The
I would like to call C routines from Fortran under linux as suggested in
section 5.6 of
the "Writing R extensions" documentation.
I'm familiar with Fortran but not with C.
I understand the example provided in Fortran:
subroutine testit()
double precision normrnd, x
call rndstart()
x = normrnd()
Full_Name: G. Grothendieck
Version: R version 2.1.0, 2005-06-10
OS: Windows XP
Submission from: (NULL) (216.59.226.184)
This is an inconsistency between by and similar functions.
The 'by' function should have an initial line of:
FUN <- match.fun(FUN)
All other similar functions including app
On 14-Jun-05 A.J. Rossini wrote:
> Fritz -
>
> That's silly. As someone pointed out, the issue is with the
> publisher, not the citation. If R-Core were a generally well-known
> and regarded publishing house such as Springer or Microsoft, it would
> not be a problem. But it's still a nebulous
At 05:22 PM 14/06/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:42:59 +1000 (EST),
> > Gordon K Smyth (GKS) wrote:
>
> > On Tue, June 14, 2005 12:49 am, Thomas Lumley said:
> >> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Gordon K Smyth wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is just a note that R would get a
For arithmetic operators,
the most elegant way often is to define so called `group methods'
for the whole group of arithmetic operators.
This actually applies also applies to the old classes and
methods.
One example where we do this is the 'Matrix' package,
see the source, e.g., in
https://svn.r
On 6/14/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:42:59 +1000 (EST),
> > Gordon K Smyth (GKS) wrote:
>
> > On Tue, June 14, 2005 12:49 am, Thomas Lumley said:
> >> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Gordon K Smyth wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is just a note that R would g
Dear all,
I need to re-define some mathematical operators (+, *, /, etc) for an S4
class based on array. All references I have found (S Programming, Green
Book) show how to define S3 methods for this (like in page 89 of S
Programming for "-.polynomial"). What is the preferred S4 way for doing
this
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:42:59 +1000 (EST),
> Gordon K Smyth (GKS) wrote:
> On Tue, June 14, 2005 12:49 am, Thomas Lumley said:
>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Gordon K Smyth wrote:
>>
>>> This is just a note that R would get a lot more citations if the
>>> recommended citation was an a
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:38:38 +1000,
> Gordon Smyth (GS) wrote:
>> Note also that R does have a User Guide, i.e., while there is plenty of
>> excellent documentation,
>> there is no single document which is a guide to the whole project.
> Oops, I meant to write "R does not have
24 matches
Mail list logo
