Full_Name: Ross Boylan
Version: 2.2.0
OS: Linux
Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58)
\eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error
--------------------------------------------
! Missing $ inserted.
<inserted text>
$
l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_
jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)}
--
! Missing $ inserted.
<inserted text>
$
l.16
--
! Missing } inserted.
<inserted text>
}
l.16
--
! Extra }, or forgotten \endgroup.
\par ...m \@noitemerr {\@@par }\fi \else {\@@par }
\fi
l.16
-------------------------------
I think this is a bug. A query to r-help has produced no response.
Note that \bf\beta seems to have been doubled.
Currently on R 2.2.0.final-4 on Debian. I think I've seen this with
many prior versions too.
Your own fault. See below. It is basic LaTeX and any LaTeX person can tell you the answer...(most probably haven't bothered...) ross at biostat.ucsf.edu wrote:> Full_Name: Ross Boylan > Version: 2.2.0 > OS: Linux > Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58) > > > \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error> -------------------------------------------- > ! Missing $ inserted. > <inserted text> > $ > l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_ > jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)}\eqn{{\bf\beta}_j} is already syntactically complete, so latex complains the next "_" is not in maths mode, and automatically switch into maths mode for you (the $ inserted message) You have to match all the braces - you need 3 right-braces after \eqn, like this, at least: \eqn{ { {\bf\beta }_j } {\bf\beta }_ .... {b(j) } }
>>>>> "Hin-Tak" == Hin-Tak Leung <hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk> >>>>> on Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:38:28 +0000 writes:Hin-Tak> Your own fault. See below. It is basic LaTeX and any LaTeX person Hin-Tak> can tell you the answer...(most probably haven't bothered...) No. Whereas I partly agree that it's Ross ``fault'' trying to use too smart LaTex (and using outdated \bf instead of \mathbf), ;-) The bug is really there, since we are talking about the Rd "language", not LaTeX, an in Rd, \eqn and \deqn are defined to have either one or two arguments -- where Ross used the 2-argument version correctly (in principle at least) --> See the manual "Writing R Extensions". >> Full_Name: Ross Boylan >> Version: 2.2.0 >> OS: Linux >> Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58) >> >> >> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error >> -------------------------------------------- >> ! Missing $ inserted. >> <inserted text> >> $ >> l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)} Hin-Tak> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j} is already syntactically complete, so latex Hin-Tak> complains the next "_" is not in maths mode, and automatically Hin-Tak> switch into maths mode for you (the $ inserted message) You have Hin-Tak> to match all the braces - you need 3 right-braces after \eqn, Hin-Tak> like this, at least: Hin-Tak> \eqn{ { {\bf\beta Hin-Tak> }_j Hin-Tak> } Hin-Tak> {\bf\beta Hin-Tak> }_ .... Hin-Tak> {b(j) Hin-Tak> } Hin-Tak> }
Martin Maechler wrote:>>>>>>"Hin-Tak" == Hin-Tak Leung <hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk> >>>>>> on Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:38:28 +0000 writes: > > > Hin-Tak> Your own fault. See below. It is basic LaTeX and any LaTeX person > Hin-Tak> can tell you the answer...(most probably haven't bothered...) > > No. Whereas I partly agree that it's Ross ``fault'' trying to > use too smart LaTex (and using outdated \bf instead of \mathbf), > ;-) > > The bug is really there, since we are talking about the Rd "language", > not LaTeX, an in Rd, \eqn and \deqn are defined to have either > one or two arguments -- where Ross used the 2-argument version > correctly (in principle at least) --> See the manual "Writing R > Extensions".Forgive me for not reading R-ext carefully, but Ross's Rd code is still "obviously" wrong in the lights of the two-argument \eqn: (really doesn't differ from the 1-arg interpretaion of \eqn) \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)} In other words, \eqn{...}{...}_... and the "_" is still outside of any maths environment, which is most probably not Ross's intention.> > > >> Full_Name: Ross Boylan > >> Version: 2.2.0 > >> OS: Linux > >> Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58) > >> > >> > >> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error > > >> -------------------------------------------- > >> ! Missing $ inserted. > >> <inserted text> > >> $ > >> l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)} > > Hin-Tak> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j} is already syntactically complete, so latex > Hin-Tak> complains the next "_" is not in maths mode, and automatically > Hin-Tak> switch into maths mode for you (the $ inserted message) You have > Hin-Tak> to match all the braces - you need 3 right-braces after \eqn, > Hin-Tak> like this, at least: > > Hin-Tak> \eqn{ { {\bf\beta > Hin-Tak> }_j > Hin-Tak> } > Hin-Tak> {\bf\beta > Hin-Tak> }_ .... > Hin-Tak> {b(j) > Hin-Tak> } > Hin-Tak> }
Martin Maechler wrote:>>>>>>"Hin-Tak" == Hin-Tak Leung <hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk> >>>>>> on Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:38:28 +0000 writes: > > > Hin-Tak> Your own fault. See below. It is basic LaTeX and any LaTeX person > Hin-Tak> can tell you the answer...(most probably haven't bothered...) > > No. Whereas I partly agree that it's Ross ``fault'' trying to > use too smart LaTex (and using outdated \bf instead of \mathbf), > ;-) > > The bug is really there, since we are talking about the Rd "language", > not LaTeX, an in Rd, \eqn and \deqn are defined to have either > one or two arguments -- where Ross used the 2-argument version > correctly (in principle at least) --> See the manual "Writing R > Extensions".Forgive me for not reading R-ext carefully, but Ross's Rd code is still "obviously" wrong in the lights of the two-argument \eqn: (really doesn't differ from the 1-arg interpretaion of \eqn) \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)} In other words, \eqn{...}{...}_... and the "_" is still outside of any maths environment, which is most probably not Ross's intention.> > > >> Full_Name: Ross Boylan > >> Version: 2.2.0 > >> OS: Linux > >> Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58) > >> > >> > >> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error > > >> -------------------------------------------- > >> ! Missing $ inserted. > >> <inserted text> > >> $ > >> l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)} > > Hin-Tak> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j} is already syntactically complete, so latex > Hin-Tak> complains the next "_" is not in maths mode, and automatically > Hin-Tak> switch into maths mode for you (the $ inserted message) You have > Hin-Tak> to match all the braces - you need 3 right-braces after \eqn, > Hin-Tak> like this, at least: > > Hin-Tak> \eqn{ { {\bf\beta > Hin-Tak> }_j > Hin-Tak> } > Hin-Tak> {\bf\beta > Hin-Tak> }_ .... > Hin-Tak> {b(j) > Hin-Tak> } > Hin-Tak> }
Reasonably Related Threads
- Rgnome depends on obsolete components libglade/libxml (PR#8247)
- Using MathJax in R's help system
- wine and build difference between R.2.4.0 and R 2.4.1 windows binaries?
- Microsoft help files
- Classification Trees and basic Random Forest pkg using t ree structures in C