With the exception of "L-BFGS-B", all of the
other optim() methods return the value of the function
when they are given a trivial function (i.e., one with no
variable arguments) to optimize. I don't think this
is a "bug" in L-BFGS-B (more like a response to
an undefined condition), but it lead
[sent this last night, may have bounced, resending]
With R 2.5.1 ...
"L-BFGS-B" behaves differently from all of the
other optim() methods, which return the value of the function
when they are given a trivial function (i.e., one with no
variable arguments) to optimize. I don't think this
i
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> This is as doumented, and I think you could say the same thing of seq().
> BTW, sequence() allows negative inputs, and I don't think you want
> sum(input) in that case.
help(sequence) says contradictory things about
the nvec[i]==0 case:
For each
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Coster, Albart wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> I am trying to develop a package. I used the function package.skeleton
> to make the directory tree of the package and then build and compiled
> the package as described (I hope). Now, I would like to increase the
> number of functions
Dear list,
I am trying to develop a package. I used the function package.skeleton to make
the directory tree of the package and then build and compiled the package as
described (I hope). Now, I would like to increase the number of functions in
the package without overwriting the existing packa
