On 4/6/07, Byron Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's come up for me when I do FFI stuff. For GUI stuff I usually just
> want to suppress, but it's possible that you'd want to detect
> visibility if you were to make the GUI more programmable. I usually
> end up having to work around the whole bu
It's come up for me when I do FFI stuff. For GUI stuff I usually just
want to suppress, but it's possible that you'd want to detect
visibility if you were to make the GUI more programmable. I usually
end up having to work around the whole business by fiddling with
R_Visible.
Speaking of R_tryEval,
Even though it isn't officially part of the API it has seen some use
so I'd prefer not to change the interface; instead add
SEXP R_tryEvalWithVis(SEXP e, SEXP env, int *ErrorOccurred, int *visible);
or something along those lines and define R_tryEval internally in
terms of that.
It may be worth
Hi Deepayan.
It is not part of the API, but it is used in numerous packages
that would break if such a change were made.
It is an easy change to make, but not necessarily a robust approach
if we keep adding parameters. If we need the room to add more,
using a structure whose fields are modified
Hi,
R_tryEval, exported in Rinternals.h but not part of the API, is
currently defined as:
R_tryEval(SEXP e, SEXP env, int *ErrorOccurred);
I'm trying to embed R in an application (basically yet another GUI),
and this has been very helpful to catch errors. It would be even more
helpful if it als
Hi,
a couple of minor fixes to R-exts.texi:
In
@subsection Setting R callbacks
which describes Rinterface.h,
The @example block correctly has
extern int (*ptr_R_ReadConsole)(char *, unsigned char *, int, int);
extern int (*ptr_R_ShowFiles)(int, char **, char **, char *,
hadley wickham wrote:
> On 4/6/07, Simon Urbanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Apr 6, 2007, at 12:22 PM, hadley wickham wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/6/07, Stefan Theussl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hadley wickham wrote:
>>> I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
>
Dear Herve
Although I am currently learning to use S4 classes, and thus I am
probably not the person
to comment on S4 classes, I completely agree with you.
Coming from C++ (most of my code is C++), this is what I have
intuitively expected,
although I was not able to formulate it. I am glad that
On 4/6/07, Simon Urbanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 6, 2007, at 12:22 PM, hadley wickham wrote:
>
> > On 4/6/07, Stefan Theussl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> hadley wickham wrote:
> > I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> > Urbanek and found out t
On 4/6/07, hadley wickham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/6/07, Stefan Theussl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hadley wickham wrote:
> > >> > I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> > >> > Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting subscriptions.
> > >> > G
Martin,
Martin Morgan wrote:
> The funny effect where class(object) seems to trigger construction of
> a new object is lazy evaluation -- the 'object' argument to
> setValidity is not evaluated until needed, i.e., until class(object)
> (anything would trigger this, including force(object)); only t
On Apr 6, 2007, at 12:22 PM, hadley wickham wrote:
> On 4/6/07, Stefan Theussl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> hadley wickham wrote:
> I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting
> subscriptions.
> Gre
Dear Herve, dear Martin,
First I want to thank Herve very much for your continuous efforts. You can
not imagine, how relieved I was that you mangaged to reproduce this
behavior.
Just when I wanted to send my reply to Herve, I received Martin's comments:
As you mention, there were two problems in
On 4/6/07, Stefan Theussl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hadley wickham wrote:
> >> > I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> >> > Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting subscriptions.
> >> > Great! However, browsing a bit on the site I found a link to ano
> > I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> > Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting subscriptions.
> > Great! However, browsing a bit on the site I found a link to another
> > forge: R-Forge (http://r-forge.r-project.org/).
> >
> > Is/will the last one
On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Gregor Gorjanc wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
> Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting subscriptions.
> Great! However, browsing a bit on the site I found a link to another
> forge: R-Forge (http://r-forge.
Hello R developers,
I am working on the "seqinr" package and I encounter a tricky problem
using a C
function.
We defined a C fonction called "getzlibsock" which is dedicated to
compressed
socket connections. This function is using the R internal C function
called "getConnection(int)" in or
Hello!
I have recently found RForge.net (http://www.rforge.net/) by Simon
Urbanek and found out today that the site is accepting subscriptions.
Great! However, browsing a bit on the site I found a link to another
forge: R-Forge (http://r-forge.r-project.org/).
Is/will the last one be the "offcial
Christian, Herve --
In the end, I think you're being caught by partial matching in
function arguments:
> f <- function(x1) cat("x1:", x1, "\n")
> f(x="hello")
x1: hello
In the functional call x gets matched to x1. In your initialization
method for SubSubClassB2, nameB gets matched to nameB2 and
19 matches
Mail list logo
