On Apr 18, 2013, at 05:39 , Paul Johnson wrote:
> 2 & 3. I want to omit space after if and for. Since if and for are
> functions in R, not keywords, I suggest that there should not be a
> space before the opening parentheses.
Wrong. They are part of language constructs (and they _are_ keywords
Dear List
I have experienced that objects generated with one of my packages used
a lot of space when saved on disc (object.size did not show this!).
some debugging revealed that formula and call objects carried the full
environment of subroutines along, including even stuff not needed by the
form
Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
Felix
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://
On 13-04-18 1:09 AM, Thomas Alexander Gerds wrote:
Dear List
I have experienced that objects generated with one of my packages used
a lot of space when saved on disc (object.size did not show this!).
some debugging revealed that formula and call objects carried the full
environment of subroutin
On 13-04-18 7:31 AM, Felix Schönbrodt wrote:
Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
This is difficult in most cases, because most pa
On 04/18/2013 05:57 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 13-04-18 7:31 AM, Felix Schönbrodt wrote:
Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
Thi
R-developers,
I have a binary R package built using R 2.14.1 that I would like to run on R
3.0.0. Unfortunately, the original source code is unavailable, so I cannot
rebuild the package as R 3.0.0 requires.
Is there a straight forward way of converting the package (.rdb, .rdx and .rds
files) in
On Apr 18, 2013, at 10:07 AM, "McGehee, Robert"
wrote:
> R-developers,
> I have a binary R package built using R 2.14.1 that I would like to run on R
> 3.0.0. Unfortunately, the original source code is unavailable, so I cannot
> rebuild the package as R 3.0.0 requires.
>
> Is there a straight
On 18/04/2013 11:07 AM, McGehee, Robert wrote:
R-developers,
I have a binary R package built using R 2.14.1 that I would like to run on R
3.0.0. Unfortunately, the original source code is unavailable, so I cannot
rebuild the package as R 3.0.0 requires.
Is there a straight forward way of conve
On 18/04/2013 16:07, McGehee, Robert wrote:
R-developers,
I have a binary R package built using R 2.14.1 that I would like to run on R
3.0.0. Unfortunately, the original source code is unavailable, so I cannot
rebuild the package as R 3.0.0 requires.
Is there a straight forward way of converti
Just tried to update devtools for R 2.15.3, and after an error about
it only being available for 3.0.0, I found my previously good-enough
devtools had disappeared. Here's how it happens:
$ R --quiet
> require(devtools)
Loading required package: devtools
pac> packageDescription("devtools")$Version
Dear R developers,
I've got an information from Prof. Ripley regarding a bug found with
AdressSanitizer in one of our packages. It is now fixed, thank you for
this information.
Now, I would like to run AddressSanitizer myself before submitting the
patched package to CRAN.
Is there a recomm
For my logging package (futile.logger) any log statements coming from a package
are assigned to a package namespace. This way you have control of log messages
at a package level (e.g. I can set the default log threshold to DEBUG, while
package 'A' has a log threshold of WARN).
I seems a hierar
OK, I concede that.
Now, how about "} else {"
I will provide patch that does only that change.
?
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 3:05 AM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2013, at 05:39 , Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>> 2 & 3. I want to omit space after if and for. Since if and for are
>> functions in R
On 18/04/2013 16:38, Thomas Petzoldt wrote:
Dear R developers,
I've got an information from Prof. Ripley regarding a bug found with
AddressSanitizer in one of our packages. It is now fixed, thank you for
this information.
Now, I would like to run AddressSanitizer myself before submitting the
pa
On Thursday 18 April 2013 17:38:06 Thomas Petzoldt wrote:
> Dear R developers,
>
> I've got an information from Prof. Ripley regarding a bug found with
> AdressSanitizer in one of our packages. It is now fixed, thank you for
> this information.
>
> Now, I would like to run AddressSanitizer myse
Dear Duncan
thank you for taking the time to answer my questions! It will be quite
some work to delete all the objects generated inside the function
... but if there is no other way to avoid a large environment then this
is what I will do.
Cheers
Thomas
Duncan Murdoch writes:
> On 13-04-18 1:
Very nice, thank you! The steps did work. Documentation, demos, examples,
functions, external data all load perfectly. For the archive, the step "make
... the correct DESCRIPTION file" only involved copying the binary's
DESCRIPTION file and removing the last line ("Built: R 2.14.1...").
To answ
I second the change of "} else {".
Regards,
Yihui
--
Yihui Xie
Phone: 515-294-2465 Web: http://yihui.name
Department of Statistics, Iowa State University
2215 Snedecor Hall, Ames, IA
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> OK, I concede that.
>
> Now, how about "} else {"
>
> I
On 18 April 2013 at 17:19, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
| On 18/04/2013 16:38, Thomas Petzoldt wrote:
| > Dear R developers,
| >
| > I've got an information from Prof. Ripley regarding a bug found with
| > AddressSanitizer in one of our packages. It is now fixed, thank you for
| > this information.
|
20 matches
Mail list logo
