Hi,
Am 21.10.2016 um 18:10 schrieb William Dunlap:
Are you saying that
f1 <- function(x) log(x)
f2 <- function(x) { log } (x)
should act differently?
yes. Or more precisely: I would expect that. "Should" implies, that I
want to change something. I just want to understand the behavior (
Wilm
Am 21.10.2016 um 17:00 schrieb William Dunlap:
> Here is a simplified version of your problem
> > { sqrt }(c(2,4,8))
> [1] 1.414214 2.00 2.828427
> Do you want that to act differently?
>
>
> Bill Dunlap
> TIBCO Software
> wdunlap tibco.com <
n"
>
> f(3)
[1] 6
>
> f<-function(x) {
+ return( 2*x )
+ }(4)(5)
>
> f(6)
[1] 12
##
which is even stranger (at least for me) and contradicts the first
listing imho in behaviour.
Best wishes,
Wilm
Am 21.10.2016 um 15:10 schrieb Wilm Schumacher:
Hi,
I hope this is
Hi,
I hope this is the correct list for my question. I found a wired
behaviour of my R installation on the evaluation of anonymous functions.
minimal working example
###
f<-function(x) {
print( 2*x )
}(2)
class(f)
f(3)
f<-function(x) {
print( 2*x )
}(4)(5)
f(6)
###
leads to
###
Hello R-devel,
I have legal problems and perhaps you can help me.
Long story short: Do have the licence of R the linking exception?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception
Is it possible to build a frontend for R under the e.u.l.a. or another
proprietary licence?
Greetings
Wilm
--
Hello R-devel,
I want to write extensions for R in C (maybe C++ and Fortran later) and it
works fine, but there is one problem, which I cannot solve (in my view).
I want to handle a matrix from R in C. For arrays there is "as.double(...)",
but nothing for a matrix.
I searched a while, but didn
