> "CM" == Cook, Malcolm
> on Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:50:58 -0600 writes:
CM> Excellent, thanks for the workaround, that gets _me_ by, for now.
CM> ~Malcolm
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Gabor Grothendieck [mailto:ggrothendi...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday
Hi,
I am currently extending one of our CRAN packages and ran into an
unexpected problem when checking the source package. I got some warnings
in the step "* checking for code/documentation mismatches". I double
checked everything and did not see anything that would actually justify
this warni
I am not sure that this query is appropriate for r-devel, it seems to be more
appropriate for r-help.
In any case, you might want to try MASS::ginv instead of solve(), if you
expect ill-conditioning. Here is one possible solution:
f <- function(X) {
invX <- tryCatch(ginv(X,
Dear all,
I get a weird effect when trying to overload the + operator and using
the Matrix package with sparse matrices. I first define a very simple
class that does not use the Matrix package but has a + operator. I
then sum two sparse matrices. The first M+M addition delivers the
expected result
Dear all,
many thanks to Jon & Ravi for their help on this, and apologies if
r-help would have been a more appropriate forum.
On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 15:43 +, Jon Clayden wrote:
> Strategy 1: Some code like this:
>if (det(X) < epsilon) {
> warning("Near singular
Speaking of optimization and speeding up R calculations...
I mentioned last week I want to speed up calculation of generalized
inverses. On Debian Wheezy with R-2.15.2, I see a huge speedup using a
souped up generalized inverse algorithm published by
V. N. Katsikis, D. Pappas, Fast computing of t
Am I correct in thinking that the ‘SystemRequirements’ field in a
package DESCRIPTION file is purely descriptive, there are no standard
elements that can be extracted by parsing it and used automatically?
This field does not seem to be widely used, even for some obvious cases
like backend data
On 12/12/2012 18:33, Paul Gilbert wrote:
Am I correct in thinking that the ‘SystemRequirements’ field in a
package DESCRIPTION file is purely descriptive, there are no standard
elements that can be extracted by parsing it and used automatically?
No.
--
Brian D. Ripley, rip...@
On 12-12-12 02:19 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
On 12/12/2012 18:33, Paul Gilbert wrote:
Am I correct in thinking that the ‘SystemRequirements’ field in a
package DESCRIPTION file is purely descriptive, there are no standard
elements that can be extracted by parsing it and used automatically?
I see three references to systemRequirements in Writing R Extensions.
The one you list in your last email, this one:
"If your package requires one of these interpreters or an extension
then this should be declared in the ‘SystemRequirements’ field of its
DESCRIPTION file." [for listing interpreter
Hi,
The man page for sort.list says:
Method ‘"radix"’ is only implemented for integer ‘x’ with a range
of less than 100,000.
but actually:
> sort.list(c(4L, -5L), method="radix")
Error in sort.list(c(4L, -5L), method = "radix") : negative value
in 'x'
Implementation bug or documenta
In R 2.7.2, if argument 'exclude' is not specified and input is already a
factor, function 'table' uses the input as is. In R 2.15.2, in the same case,
function 'table' always applies function 'factor' to the input. The time spent
by 'factor' is not long, but is not negligible.
I suggest to ch
12 matches
Mail list logo
