I recently moved a function 'subset.with.warning' into the 'mvbutils' package
(a version not yet on CRAN). When I tried RCMD CHECK, I got this warning:
* checking S3 generic/method consistency ... WARNING
subset:
function(x, ...)
subset.with.warning:
fu
I think the explanation of the NAMED field in the R Internals document
is incorrect. In Section 1.1.2, it says:
The named field is set and accessed by the SET_NAMED and NAMED macros,
and take values 0, 1 and 2. R has a `call by value' illusion, so an
assignment like
b <- a
ap
isPackageInstalled <- function(package, ...) {
path <- system.file(package=package);
(path != "");
}
taken from R.utils (which also has a isPackageLoaded()).
/Henrik
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 24 August 2010 at 15:40, Hadley Wickham wrote:
> | Hi all,
>
On 24 August 2010 at 15:40, Hadley Wickham wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| If a package suggests another package in its description, you can
| check it at runtime with requires. How do you do check if a package
| is available without loading it, if you only want to access one
| function in the package name
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010, Hadley Wickham wrote:
Hi all,
If a package suggests another package in its description, you can
check it at runtime with requires. How do you do check if a package
Well, not really as requires() can give an error, at least until
2.12.0 is out. So you need to wrap it in
Hi all,
If a package suggests another package in its description, you can
check it at runtime with requires. How do you do check if a package
is available without loading it, if you only want to access one
function in the package namespace.
Thanks,
Hadley
--
Assistant Professor / Dobelman Fam
I have two packages, one that does the actual work (SC) and the other
a Tcl/Tk UI (SCUI) that invokes methods within the former. Within the
SCUI's invocation method, I save an object returned from SC, the
results of a long-running method.
Now the object is completely described by the SC package. U
In the mean time you could have student run the following code each time (put
it into .Rprofile or something) until they learn good coding practices:
testfunc <- function(expr, value, ok, visible) {
tmp <- deparse(expr)
if( grepl( '<- *[0-9.]+ *[])&|]', tmp ) ) {
w
loosmart wrote:
>
> Good afternoon!
>
> It may seem trivial to some/most of You, but I found it difficult to
> properly include a C++-based .dll into a package that I want to build for
> usage in R. I read through the "Writing R extensions..." & "R
> administration ..." instructions, but it se
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Michael Dewey wrote:
> The thing I find most rude on the list is not the occasional abrupt postings
> by people who are obviously having a bad day but the number of fairly long
> exchanges which end unresolved as the OP never bothers to post a conclusion
> and we
I can claim some responsibility for 3 sets of functions that are in "core R",
well they are in packages, but then so is the plot function, but packages that
are loaded automatically in a default installation of R. My piece of the
responsibility is probably more the blame than credit (the credit
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Ted Harding
wrote:
> So, on those grounds, I doubt its wisdom (and would prefer
> giving the advice to bracket things, as in "x<(-3)". It's
> a potential syntactic trap, but it's only one of many which
> can be avoided in similar ways, and I think it's better to
>
On 24-Aug-10 14:42:11, Davor Cubranic wrote:
> On August 23, 2010 01:27:24 pm Philippe Grosjean wrote:
>> They have to write such a code like this:
>>
>> if (x < -3) do_something
>>
>> That way, there is no ambiguity. Don't you think it's important to
>> write clear code, including by using space
hi ted, philippe, and others---I agree with everything you write about
good coding practice.none of us would be writing x<-3, even when
we want to assign 3. we know better. we would at least use a space,
if not a paren. alas, my suggestion is not so much for you. It is
trying to spare novi
On August 23, 2010 01:27:24 pm Philippe Grosjean wrote:
> They have to write such a code like this:
>
> if (x < -3) do_something
>
> That way, there is no ambiguity. Don't you think it's important to
> write clear code, including by using spaces where it makes it easier
> to read,... and less amb
At 01:08 20/08/2010, Spencer Graves wrote:
What do you think about adding a "No RTFM"
policy to the R mailing lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
Spencer,
You raise an interesting point but the responses
to your post remind us that people (and indeed
whole cultures) are not all
Hi the list,
I am trying to use R forge. I created an account. I put my project on R
forge. I installed TortoiseSVN on my computer (windows).
Then I did not manage to go through all the key process but I see in the
R-Forge Manual that there is another option:
"2. it is sufficient to use pass
On 24 August 2010 at 09:13, Göran Broström wrote:
|
| On 2010-08-24 05:37, Kasper Daniel Hansen wrote:
| > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Radford Neal
wrote:
| >>> On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
| >>
| In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix products wil
On 2010-08-24 05:37, Kasper Daniel Hansen wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix products will
in this version be done in the matprod routine, not the Fortran routi
19 matches
Mail list logo
