R help - Jul 2006 - Some problems with latex(ftable)

The ftable structure is not an ordinary matrix.  Instead, it has the
body of the table with several cbind- and rbind-ed rows and columns of
label information.  The example in ?ftable has two row factors and two
column factors.

Continuing with the example in ?ftable, enter


tmp <- ftable(mtcars$cyl, mtcars$vs, mtcars$am, mtcars$gear, row.vars = c(2,
4),
              dnn = c("Cylinders", "V/S",
"Transmission", "Gears"))

print.default(tmp)

To get what you are looking for, you will need to intercept write.ftable
with, for example,

trace(write.ftable, exit=recover)

then do 

3
tmp.latex <- latex(t(x))
print.default(tmp.latex)

Now open up t.latex and prepend
\documentstyle{article}
\begin{document}

and append
\end{document}

then latex it.

This gets you close to what you want and you can work with the generated
t.tex file to get the rest of the detail.  Or you can work with the
numerous arguments we built into latex (see ?latex) to get some of them
automatically generated.

tmp2.latex <- latex(t(x), col.just=rep(c("l","r"),
c(3,6)),
                    n.rgroup=c(3,6), file="t2.tex")


Now open up t2.latex and pre- and append the latex controls to it.


This works well for one or two examples.  To do many, then you will
need to follow Frank's suggestion and build all of this into a method.
Once the method works well, send it to Frank and he will consider
including it in the next release (Frank, I hope that's a fair offer I
make for you to do).


This raises a question from me to the R developers.  I would have
written write.ftable to return t(x), not ox.  print is constrained to
return its argument.  I thought write had more freedom.  Then I would
respecify

print.ftable <- function (x, digits = getOption("digits"), ...) {
     write.ftable(x, quote = FALSE, digits = digits)
     invisible(x)
}

Had this been done then the current task would simplify to

latex(write(tmp))

Te question is: why was write.ftable designed to follow the
print.ftable constraint on returned value.

ps. I just designed the method.  Take write.ftable, drop the last line
and give it a new name.  then you can latex the output of that new
function.

Rich

Richard M. Heiberger wrote:
> The ftable structure is not an ordinary matrix.  Instead, it has the
> body of the table with several cbind- and rbind-ed rows and columns of
> label information.  The example in ?ftable has two row factors and two
> column factors.
> 
> Continuing with the example in ?ftable, enter
> 
> 
> tmp <- ftable(mtcars$cyl, mtcars$vs, mtcars$am, mtcars$gear, row.vars =
c(2, 4),
>               dnn = c("Cylinders", "V/S",
"Transmission", "Gears"))
> 
> print.default(tmp)
> 
> To get what you are looking for, you will need to intercept write.ftable
> with, for example,
> 
> trace(write.ftable, exit=recover)
> 
> then do 
> 
> 3
> tmp.latex <- latex(t(x))
> print.default(tmp.latex)
> 
> Now open up t.latex and prepend
> \documentstyle{article}
> \begin{document}
> 
> and append
> \end{document}
> 
> then latex it.
> 
> This gets you close to what you want and you can work with the generated
> t.tex file to get the rest of the detail.  Or you can work with the
> numerous arguments we built into latex (see ?latex) to get some of them
> automatically generated.
> 
> tmp2.latex <- latex(t(x), col.just=rep(c("l","r"),
c(3,6)),
>                     n.rgroup=c(3,6), file="t2.tex")
> 
> 
> Now open up t2.latex and pre- and append the latex controls to it.
> 
> 
> This works well for one or two examples.  To do many, then you will
> need to follow Frank's suggestion and build all of this into a method.
> Once the method works well, send it to Frank and he will consider
> including it in the next release (Frank, I hope that's a fair offer I
> make for you to do).
Yes, working with Charles Thomas Dupont we'll be glad to add such a 
contribution to latex.  Thanks for your excellent ideas above Rich.

-Frank
> 
> 
> This raises a question from me to the R developers.  I would have
> written write.ftable to return t(x), not ox.  print is constrained to
> return its argument.  I thought write had more freedom.  Then I would
> respecify
> 
> print.ftable <- function (x, digits = getOption("digits"),
...) {
>      write.ftable(x, quote = FALSE, digits = digits)
>      invisible(x)
> }
> 
> Had this been done then the current task would simplify to
> 
> latex(write(tmp))
> 
> Te question is: why was write.ftable designed to follow the
> print.ftable constraint on returned value.
> 
> ps. I just designed the method.  Take write.ftable, drop the last line
> and give it a new name.  then you can latex the output of that new
> function.
> 
> Rich
>