Dear Terry,
first of all, thank you for your immense work. At the moment, I don't
have a small reproducible example for the ratetable difficulty I
have. I will work on it. Maybe the error message I get is of some
information to you.
Error in match.ratetable(m[, rate], ratetable) :
Data has a date type variable, but the reference ratetable is not
a date for variable year
If I want to make str(survexp.ode) that is my ratetable, I get:
str(survexp.ode)
Error in `[.ratetable`(object, seq_len(iv.len)) : Invalid subscript
The same, however, is possible in version 2.34-1^
Try:
str(survexp.us)
Error in `[.ratetable`(object, seq_len(iv.len)) : Invalid subscript
But with unclass() it works
str(unclass(survexp.us))
num [1:113, 1:2, 1:65] 1.58e-02 1.87e-03 3.01e-04 6.05e-05 1.52e-05 ...
- attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 3
..$ : chr [1:113] "0-1d" "1-7d" "7-28d"
"28-365d" ...
..$ : chr [1:2] "male" "female"
..$ : chr [1:65] "1940" "1941" "1942"
"1943" ...
- attr(*, "dimid")= chr [1:3] "age" "sex"
"year"
- attr(*, "type")= num [1:3] 2 1 4
- attr(*, "cutpoints")=List of 3
..$ : num [1:113] 0 1 7 28 365 ...
..$ : NULL
..$ : int [1:65] -7305 -6939 -6574 -6209 -5844 -5478 -5113 -4748
-4383 -4017 ...
- attr(*, "summary")=function (R)
>
Concerning the legend, I fully aggree with you. It's just that I have
several syntax files, where I made use of the legend parameters and
so I noted the change. For these files I rebuilt your old plot.survfit().
Further I appreciate your new function survmean(). At the moment it
seems to be intended as internal, and not documented in the help.
Still, I use it to get the old form of the output and to get the
output as an object. I think, with only right censored data, n.max
and n.start are not informative.
To underline, I appreciate your changes, it's only a little difficult
to recognize them correctly by trial and error.
Thanks,
Heinz
At 18:57 21.05.2009, Terry Therneau wrote:> > Several changes in print.survfit, plot.survfit and seemingly in
> the structure
> > of ratetabels effect some of my syntax files.
> > Is there somewhere a documentation of these changes, besides the
> code itself?
>
> I agree, the Changelog.09 file is not as comprehensive as one would like.
>Specific comments:
>
> 1. The ratetables were recently changed to accomodate a new
> option. I thought
>that I had made them completely backwards compatable with the old --
>please let
>me know specifics if I overlooked something.
> The routines that make use of the rate tables can now use
> multiple date types,
>but they still support the older 'date' class.
>
> 2. My local code and the R code had gotton badly out of sync, I spent a
>substantial fraction of my evenings re-merging them for over a
>year. 2/3 of the
>changes were disjoint improvments in the two trees, these were easy
>to merge.
>The hardest were survfit and its print/plot methods and some summary
methods,
>where both of us had worked towards the same goal but in not quite
>the same way.
> I had made 3x as many updates to survfit as the R tree, so used
> my (Mayo) code
>as the base, almost all the others stayed closer to the R side.
> Feel free to ask me direct questions about any feature or change. I
can't
>necessarily promise fast resolution, but will try.
>
> 3. I don't understand putting legend or title options into a plot
method,
>since a separate call after the plot is so much more flexible. They
>got pushed
>to the bottom of my change list, and then completely forgotton.
>
> 4. In the last few weeks issues with anova.coxph, and
>predict.coxph/factors/newdata were raised. The fixes were added to
>Rforge last
>night, and include 2 new test cases to avoid future mishaps.
>
> Terry T.
>
>