Re: [Rd] Enhancement request: anonymous connections

2005-12-28 Thread Byron Ellis
I think what you're suggesting is that connections should become first-class citizens in the R world by becoming a CONSXP, an EXTPTRSXP + Finalizer or whatever (which wouldn't bother me a bit, BTW). Then they'd play by the same rules as everything else, although you might want to have an ex

Re: [Rd] .Call not counting parameters consistently (PR#8450)

2005-12-28 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 12/28/2005 3:01 PM, Duncan Temple Lang wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Coincidentally, I am in the process of working on a related aspect of > symbol resolution. > > The issue is likely to be the caching of native symbols > that we do. We do not cache the registrat

Re: [Rd] .Call not counting parameters consistently (PR#8450)

2005-12-28 Thread ligges
Duncan Temple Lang wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Coincidentally, I am in the process of working on a related aspect of > symbol resolution. > > The issue is likely to be the caching of native symbols > that we do. We do not cache the registration information, > jus

Re: [Rd] .Call not counting parameters consistently (PR#8450)

2005-12-28 Thread Duncan Temple Lang
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Coincidentally, I am in the process of working on a related aspect of symbol resolution. The issue is likely to be the caching of native symbols that we do. We do not cache the registration information, just the address of the routine. And so the tes

[Rd] .Call not counting parameters consistently (PR#8450)

2005-12-28 Thread murdoch
The R_registerRoutines C function allows the number of parameters to a .Call function to be registered. For example, the tools package function md5sum() calls "Rmd5", which has been registered to require just one parameter. But if it is called with the wrong number of parameters, only the first e

Re: [Rd] Enhancement request: anonymous connections

2005-12-28 Thread Seth Falcon
On 27 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This is a bug in load, isn't it? load() opens the connection but > doesn't close it. Well, it may be that load needs a small fix, but that doesn't fix anonymous connections in general, IMO. The loop could easily have been: for (i in 1:50) { print(l

Re: [Rd] NaN in R distribution functions

2005-12-28 Thread Prof Brian Ripley
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Gregor Gorjanc wrote: > Dear R developers, > > I noticed that core R distribution functions return NaN, when parameter > values are out of parameter space. I have looked in source code and > found that warnings and return of NaN are done internally in C code. For > dgamma.c th

[Rd] NaN in R distribution functions

2005-12-28 Thread Gregor Gorjanc
Dear R developers, I noticed that core R distribution functions return NaN, when parameter values are out of parameter space. I have looked in source code and found that warnings and return of NaN are done internally in C code. For dgamma.c the line 49 is: if (shape <= 0 || scale <= 0) ML

[Rd] update.packages() and loaded packages (PR#8448)

2005-12-28 Thread gregor . gorjanc
Hello! This is not a severe bug, but an inconsistency in update.packages(). I updated packages and I was not carefull enough to detach loaded packages. The update.packages() warrned me about this, which is fine, but at the end of the update the following warrning was issued (the whole session