>>>>> William Dunlap <wdunlap at tibco.com> >>>>> on Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:33:47 -0700 writes:> Re withAutoprint(), Splus's source() function could take a expression > (literal or not) in place of a file name or text so it could support > withAutoprint-like functionality in its GUI. E.g., >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs.literal= { x <- 3:7 ; sum(x) ; y <- log(x) > ; x - 100}, prompt="--> ") --> x <- 3:7 --> sum(x) > [1] 25 --> y <- log(x) --> x - 100 > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93 > or >> expr <- quote({ x <- 3:7 ; sum(x) ; y <- log(x) ; x - 100}) >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs = expr, prompt="--> ") --> x <- 3:7 --> sum(x) > [1] 25 --> y <- log(x) --> x - 100 > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93 > It was easy to implement, since exprs's default value is parse(file) or > parse(text=text), which source is calculating anyway. > Bill Dunlap > TIBCO Software > wdunlap tibco.com Thank you, Bill (and the other correspondents); that's indeed a very good suggestion : I've come to the conclusion that Duncan and Bill are right: One should do this in R (not C) and as Bill hinted, one should use source(). I first tried to do it separately, just "like source()", but a considerable part of the source of source() {:-)} is about using src attributes instead of deparse() when the former are present, and it does make sense to generalize withAutoprint() to have the same feature, so after all, have it call source(). I've spent a few hours now trying things and variants, also found I needed to enhance source() very slightly also in a few other details, and now (in my uncommitted version of R-devel), withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10 }) produces> withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10 }) > x <- 1:12 > x - 1[1] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11> (y <- (x - 5)^2)[1] 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49> z <- y > z - 10[1] 6 -1 -6 -9 -10 -9 -6 -1 6 15 26 39>and is equivalent to withAutoprint(expression(x <- 1:12, x-1, (y <- (x-5)^2), z <- y, z - 10 )) I don't see any way around the "mis-feature" that all "input" expressions are in the end shown twice in the "output" (the first time by showing the withAutoprint(...) call itself). The function *name* is "not bad" but also a bit longish; maybe there are better ideas? (not longer, no "_" - I know this is a matter of taste only) Martin > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> > wrote: >> On R-help, with subject >> '[R] source() does not include added code' >> >> >>>>> Joshua Ulrich <josh.m.ulrich at gmail.com> >> >>>>> on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:35:01 -0500 writes: >> >> > I have quantstrat installed and it works fine for me. If you're >> > asking why the output of t(tradeStats('macross')) isn't being >> printed, >> > that's because of what's described in the first paragraph in the >> > *Details* section of help("source"): >> >> > Note that running code via ?source? differs in a few respects from >> > entering it at the R command line. Since expressions are not >> > executed at the top level, auto-printing is not done. So you will >> > need to include explicit ?print? calls for things you want to be >> > printed (and remember that this includes plotting by ?lattice?, >> > FAQ Q7.22). >> >> >> >> > So you need: >> >> > print(t(tradeStats('macross'))) >> >> > if you want the output printed to the console. >> >> indeed, and "of course"" ;-) >> >> As my subject indicates, this is another case, where it would be >> very convenient to have a function >> >> withAutoprint() >> >> so the OP could have (hopefully) have used >> withAutoprint(source(..)) >> though that would have been equivalent to the already nicely existing >> >> source(.., print.eval = TRUE) >> >> which works via the withVisible(.) utility that returns for each >> 'expression' if it would auto print or not, and then does print (or >> not) accordingly. >> >> My own use cases for such a withAutoprint({...}) >> are demos and examples, sometimes even package tests which I want to print: >> >> Assume I have a nice demo / example on a help page/ ... >> >> foo(..) >> (z <- bar(..)) >> summary(z) >> .... >> >> where I carefully do print parts (and don't others), >> and suddenly I find I want to run that part of the demo / >> example / test only in some circumstances, e.g., only when >> interactive, but not in BATCH, or only if it is me, the package maintainer, >> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"), "maechler") ) { >> foo(..) >> (z <- bar(..)) >> summary(z) >> .... >> } >> >> Now all the auto-printing is gone, and >> >> 1) I have to find out which of these function calls do autoprint and wrap >> a print(..) around these, and >> >> 2) the result is quite ugly (for an example on a help page etc.) >> >> What I would like in a future R, is to be able to simply wrap the "{ >> .. } above with an 'withAutoprint(.) : >> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"), "maechler") ) withAutoprint({ >> foo(..) >> (z <- bar(..)) >> summary(z) >> .... >> }) >> >> Conceptually such a function could be written similar to source() with an R >> level for loop, treating each expression separately, calling eval(.) etc. >> That may cost too much performnace, ... still to have it would be better >> than >> not having the possibility. >> >> ---- >> >> If you read so far, you'd probably agree that such a function >> could be a nice asset in R, >> notably if it was possible to do this on the fast C level of R's main >> REPL. >> >> Have any of you looked into how this could be provided in R ? >> If you know the source a little, you will remember that there's >> the global variable R_Visible which is crucial here. >> The problem with that is that it *is* global, and only available >> as that; that the auto-printing "concept" is so linked to "toplevel >> context" >> and that is not easy, and AFAIK not so much centralized in one place in the >> source. Consequently, all kind of (very) low level functions manipulate >> R_Visible >> temporarily.... and so a C level implementation of withAutoprint() may >> need considerable more changes than just setting R_Visible to TRUE in one >> place. >> >> Have any efforts / experiments already happened towards providing such >> functionality ? >> >> ______________________________________________ >> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Martin, did you post your code for withAutoprint() anywhere?
Building withAutoprint() on top of source() definitely makes sense,
unless, as Bill says, source() itself could provide the same feature.
To differentiate between withAutoprint({ x <- 1 }) and
withAutoprint(expr) where is an expression / language object, one
could have an optional argument `substitute=TRUE`, e.g.
withAutoprint <- function(expr, substitute = TRUE, ...) {
if (substitute) expr <- substitute(expr)
[...]
}
Just some thoughts
/Henrik
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Martin Maechler
<maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote:>>>>>> William Dunlap <wdunlap at tibco.com>
>>>>>> on Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:33:47 -0700 writes:
>
> > Re withAutoprint(), Splus's source() function could take a
expression
> > (literal or not) in place of a file name or text so it could
support
> > withAutoprint-like functionality in its GUI. E.g.,
>
> >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs.literal= { x <- 3:7 ; sum(x)
; y <- log(x)
> > ; x - 100}, prompt="--> ")
> --> x <- 3:7
> --> sum(x)
> > [1] 25
> --> y <- log(x)
> --> x - 100
> > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93
>
> > or
>
> >> expr <- quote({ x <- 3:7 ; sum(x) ; y <- log(x) ; x -
100})
> >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs = expr, prompt="-->
")
> --> x <- 3:7
> --> sum(x)
> > [1] 25
> --> y <- log(x)
> --> x - 100
> > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93
>
> > It was easy to implement, since exprs's default value is
parse(file) or
> > parse(text=text), which source is calculating anyway.
>
>
> > Bill Dunlap
> > TIBCO Software
> > wdunlap tibco.com
>
> Thank you, Bill (and the other correspondents); that's indeed a
> very good suggestion :
>
> I've come to the conclusion that Duncan and Bill are right: One
> should do this in R (not C) and as Bill hinted, one should use
> source(). I first tried to do it separately, just "like
source()",
> but a considerable part of the source of source() {:-)} is
> about using src attributes instead of deparse() when the former
> are present, and it does make sense to generalize
> withAutoprint() to have the same feature, so after all, have it
> call source().
>
> I've spent a few hours now trying things and variants, also
> found I needed to enhance source() very slightly also in a few
> other details, and now (in my uncommitted version of R-devel),
>
> withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10
})
>
> produces
>
>> withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10
})
>> x <- 1:12
>> x - 1
> [1] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
>> (y <- (x - 5)^2)
> [1] 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49
>> z <- y
>> z - 10
> [1] 6 -1 -6 -9 -10 -9 -6 -1 6 15 26 39
>>
>
> and is equivalent to
>
> withAutoprint(expression(x <- 1:12, x-1, (y <- (x-5)^2), z <-
y, z - 10 ))
>
> I don't see any way around the "mis-feature" that all
"input"
> expressions are in the end shown twice in the "output" (the
> first time by showing the withAutoprint(...) call itself).
>
> The function *name* is "not bad" but also a bit longish;
> maybe there are better ideas? (not longer, no "_" - I know this
> is a matter of taste only)
>
> Martin
>
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Martin Maechler <maechler at
stat.math.ethz.ch>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On R-help, with subject
> >> '[R] source() does not include added code'
> >>
> >> >>>>> Joshua Ulrich <josh.m.ulrich at
gmail.com>
> >> >>>>> on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:35:01 -0500
writes:
> >>
> >> > I have quantstrat installed and it works fine for me. If
you're
> >> > asking why the output of t(tradeStats('macross'))
isn't being
> >> printed,
> >> > that's because of what's described in the first
paragraph in the
> >> > *Details* section of help("source"):
> >>
> >> > Note that running code via ?source? differs in a few
respects from
> >> > entering it at the R command line. Since expressions are
not
> >> > executed at the top level, auto-printing is not done. So
you will
> >> > need to include explicit ?print? calls for things you
want to be
> >> > printed (and remember that this includes plotting by
?lattice?,
> >> > FAQ Q7.22).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > So you need:
> >>
> >> > print(t(tradeStats('macross')))
> >>
> >> > if you want the output printed to the console.
> >>
> >> indeed, and "of course"" ;-)
> >>
> >> As my subject indicates, this is another case, where it would
be
> >> very convenient to have a function
> >>
> >> withAutoprint()
> >>
> >> so the OP could have (hopefully) have used
> >> withAutoprint(source(..))
> >> though that would have been equivalent to the already nicely
existing
> >>
> >> source(.., print.eval = TRUE)
> >>
> >> which works via the withVisible(.) utility that returns for
each
> >> 'expression' if it would auto print or not, and then
does print (or
> >> not) accordingly.
> >>
> >> My own use cases for such a withAutoprint({...})
> >> are demos and examples, sometimes even package tests which I
want to print:
> >>
> >> Assume I have a nice demo / example on a help page/ ...
> >>
> >> foo(..)
> >> (z <- bar(..))
> >> summary(z)
> >> ....
> >>
> >> where I carefully do print parts (and don't others),
> >> and suddenly I find I want to run that part of the demo /
> >> example / test only in some circumstances, e.g., only when
> >> interactive, but not in BATCH, or only if it is me, the
package maintainer,
> >>
> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"),
"maechler") ) {
> >> foo(..)
> >> (z <- bar(..))
> >> summary(z)
> >> ....
> >> }
> >>
> >> Now all the auto-printing is gone, and
> >>
> >> 1) I have to find out which of these function calls do
autoprint and wrap
> >> a print(..) around these, and
> >>
> >> 2) the result is quite ugly (for an example on a help page
etc.)
> >>
> >> What I would like in a future R, is to be able to simply wrap
the "{
> >> .. } above with an 'withAutoprint(.) :
> >>
> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"),
"maechler") ) withAutoprint({
> >> foo(..)
> >> (z <- bar(..))
> >> summary(z)
> >> ....
> >> })
> >>
> >> Conceptually such a function could be written similar to
source() with an R
> >> level for loop, treating each expression separately, calling
eval(.) etc.
> >> That may cost too much performnace, ... still to have it would
be better
> >> than
> >> not having the possibility.
> >>
> >> ----
> >>
> >> If you read so far, you'd probably agree that such a
function
> >> could be a nice asset in R,
> >> notably if it was possible to do this on the fast C level of
R's main
> >> REPL.
> >>
> >> Have any of you looked into how this could be provided in R ?
> >> If you know the source a little, you will remember that
there's
> >> the global variable R_Visible which is crucial here.
> >> The problem with that is that it *is* global, and only
available
> >> as that; that the auto-printing "concept" is so
linked to "toplevel
> >> context"
> >> and that is not easy, and AFAIK not so much centralized in one
place in the
> >> source. Consequently, all kind of (very) low level functions
manipulate
> >> R_Visible
> >> temporarily.... and so a C level implementation of
withAutoprint() may
> >> need considerable more changes than just setting R_Visible to
TRUE in one
> >> place.
> >>
> >> Have any efforts / experiments already happened towards
providing such
> >> functionality ?
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>>>> Henrik Bengtsson <henrik.bengtsson at gmail.com> >>>>> on Sat, 24 Sep 2016 11:31:49 -0700 writes:> Martin, did you post your code for withAutoprint() anywhere? > Building withAutoprint() on top of source() definitely makes sense, > unless, as Bill says, source() itself could provide the same feature. I was really mainly asking for advice about the function name .. and got none. I'm now committing my version (including (somewhat incomplete) documentation, so you (all) can look at it and try / test it further. > To differentiate between withAutoprint({ x <- 1 }) and > withAutoprint(expr) where is an expression / language object, one > could have an optional argument `substitute=TRUE`, e.g. > withAutoprint <- function(expr, substitute = TRUE, ...) { > if (substitute) expr <- substitute(expr) > [...] > } I think my approach is nicer insofar it does not seem to need such an argument.... I'm sure you'll try to disprove that ;-) Martin > Just some thoughts > /Henrik > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 6:37 AM, Martin Maechler > <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: >>>>>>> William Dunlap <wdunlap at tibco.com> >>>>>>> on Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:33:47 -0700 writes: >> >> > Re withAutoprint(), Splus's source() function could take a expression >> > (literal or not) in place of a file name or text so it could support >> > withAutoprint-like functionality in its GUI. E.g., >> >> >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs.literal= { x <- 3:7 ; sum(x) ; y <- log(x) >> > ; x - 100}, prompt="--> ") --> x <- 3:7 --> sum(x) >> > [1] 25 --> y <- log(x) --> x - 100 >> > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93 >> >> > or >> >> >> expr <- quote({ x <- 3:7 ; sum(x) ; y <- log(x) ; x - 100}) >> >> source(auto.print=TRUE, exprs = expr, prompt="--> ") --> x <- 3:7 --> sum(x) >> > [1] 25 --> y <- log(x) --> x - 100 >> > [1] -97 -96 -95 -94 -93 >> >> > It was easy to implement, since exprs's default value is parse(file) or >> > parse(text=text), which source is calculating anyway. >> >> >> > Bill Dunlap >> > TIBCO Software >> > wdunlap tibco.com >> >> Thank you, Bill (and the other correspondents); that's indeed a >> very good suggestion : >> >> I've come to the conclusion that Duncan and Bill are right: One >> should do this in R (not C) and as Bill hinted, one should use >> source(). I first tried to do it separately, just "like source()", >> but a considerable part of the source of source() {:-)} is >> about using src attributes instead of deparse() when the former >> are present, and it does make sense to generalize >> withAutoprint() to have the same feature, so after all, have it >> call source(). >> >> I've spent a few hours now trying things and variants, also >> found I needed to enhance source() very slightly also in a few >> other details, and now (in my uncommitted version of R-devel), >> >> withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10 }) >> >> produces >> >>> withAutoprint({ x <- 1:12; x-1; (y <- (x-5)^2); z <- y; z - 10 }) >>> x <- 1:12 >>> x - 1 >> [1] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>> (y <- (x - 5)^2) >> [1] 16 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 >>> z <- y >>> z - 10 >> [1] 6 -1 -6 -9 -10 -9 -6 -1 6 15 26 39 >>> >> >> and is equivalent to >> >> withAutoprint(expression(x <- 1:12, x-1, (y <- (x-5)^2), z <- y, z - 10 )) >> >> I don't see any way around the "mis-feature" that all "input" >> expressions are in the end shown twice in the "output" (the >> first time by showing the withAutoprint(...) call itself). >> >> The function *name* is "not bad" but also a bit longish; >> maybe there are better ideas? (not longer, no "_" - I know this >> is a matter of taste only) >> >> Martin >> >> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> >> > wrote: >> >> >> On R-help, with subject >> >> '[R] source() does not include added code' >> >> >> >> >>>>> Joshua Ulrich <josh.m.ulrich at gmail.com> >> >> >>>>> on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:35:01 -0500 writes: >> >> >> >> > I have quantstrat installed and it works fine for me. If you're >> >> > asking why the output of t(tradeStats('macross')) isn't being >> >> printed, >> >> > that's because of what's described in the first paragraph in the >> >> > *Details* section of help("source"): >> >> >> >> > Note that running code via ?source? differs in a few respects from >> >> > entering it at the R command line. Since expressions are not >> >> > executed at the top level, auto-printing is not done. So you will >> >> > need to include explicit ?print? calls for things you want to be >> >> > printed (and remember that this includes plotting by ?lattice?, >> >> > FAQ Q7.22). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > So you need: >> >> >> >> > print(t(tradeStats('macross'))) >> >> >> >> > if you want the output printed to the console. >> >> >> >> indeed, and "of course"" ;-) >> >> >> >> As my subject indicates, this is another case, where it would be >> >> very convenient to have a function >> >> >> >> withAutoprint() >> >> >> >> so the OP could have (hopefully) have used >> >> withAutoprint(source(..)) >> >> though that would have been equivalent to the already nicely existing >> >> >> >> source(.., print.eval = TRUE) >> >> >> >> which works via the withVisible(.) utility that returns for each >> >> 'expression' if it would auto print or not, and then does print (or >> >> not) accordingly. >> >> >> >> My own use cases for such a withAutoprint({...}) >> >> are demos and examples, sometimes even package tests which I want to print: >> >> >> >> Assume I have a nice demo / example on a help page/ ... >> >> >> >> foo(..) >> >> (z <- bar(..)) >> >> summary(z) >> >> .... >> >> >> >> where I carefully do print parts (and don't others), >> >> and suddenly I find I want to run that part of the demo / >> >> example / test only in some circumstances, e.g., only when >> >> interactive, but not in BATCH, or only if it is me, the package maintainer, >> >> >> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"), "maechler") ) { >> >> foo(..) >> >> (z <- bar(..)) >> >> summary(z) >> >> .... >> >> } >> >> >> >> Now all the auto-printing is gone, and >> >> >> >> 1) I have to find out which of these function calls do autoprint and wrap >> >> a print(..) around these, and >> >> >> >> 2) the result is quite ugly (for an example on a help page etc.) >> >> >> >> What I would like in a future R, is to be able to simply wrap the "{ >> >> .. } above with an 'withAutoprint(.) : >> >> >> >> if( identical(Sys.getenv("USER"), "maechler") ) withAutoprint({ >> >> foo(..) >> >> (z <- bar(..)) >> >> summary(z) >> >> .... >> >> }) >> >> >> >> Conceptually such a function could be written similar to source() with an R >> >> level for loop, treating each expression separately, calling eval(.) etc. >> >> That may cost too much performnace, ... still to have it would be better >> >> than >> >> not having the possibility. >> >> >> >> ---- >> >> >> >> If you read so far, you'd probably agree that such a function >> >> could be a nice asset in R, >> >> notably if it was possible to do this on the fast C level of R's main >> >> REPL. >> >> >> >> Have any of you looked into how this could be provided in R ? >> >> If you know the source a little, you will remember that there's >> >> the global variable R_Visible which is crucial here. >> >> The problem with that is that it *is* global, and only available >> >> as that; that the auto-printing "concept" is so linked to "toplevel >> >> context" >> >> and that is not easy, and AFAIK not so much centralized in one place in the >> >> source. Consequently, all kind of (very) low level functions manipulate >> >> R_Visible >> >> temporarily.... and so a C level implementation of withAutoprint() may >> >> need considerable more changes than just setting R_Visible to TRUE in one >> >> place. >> >> >> >> Have any efforts / experiments already happened towards providing such >> >> functionality ? >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________ >> >> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list >> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >> >> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> ______________________________________________ >> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel