On Jan 11, 2011, at 6:55 PM,
wrote:
> No. Lots of internal functions expect their callers to protect their
> arguments, for efficiency reasons. eval is called very often and almost
> always with argument that are protected because they are in the evaluation
> engine, so it would be wasteful
No. Lots of internal functions expect their callers to protect their
arguments, for efficiency reasons. eval is called very often and
almost always with argument that are protected because they are in the
evaluation engine, so it would be wasteful and potentially very costly
if eval protected its
Interesting, I'd argue that the bug is in eval() not protecting its arguments
since the usual convention is for functions to protect its arguments...
On Jan 11, 2011, at 2:33 PM, Romain Francois wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Using R-devel (rev 53950), I get inconsistent results with as.environment(
> VE
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Romain Francois
wrote:
> Le 11/01/11 19:57, Romain Francois a écrit :
>
> Le 11/01/11 19:46, Douglas Bates a écrit :
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Dominick
>>> Samperi wrote:
>>>
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Romain
Francois
Hello,
Using R-devel (rev 53950), I get inconsistent results with
as.environment( VECSXP ) when gctorture is on.
Consider:
a <- list( aa = rnorm, bb = runif )
gctorture(TRUE)
as.environment( a )
The last line sometimes produces the correct environment, but sometimes
I get errors. Here are t
