search for: argumetn

..."whose default method" 3. "wierd" misspelled in base/html/Hershey.html 4. "details" is doubled under the "Details" section of lib/R/library/base/html/deviance.html 5. "it \emph{not}" to "is \emph{not}" in help(matrix) Details 6. "argumetn" in list of arguments in help(complex) Permanent address: Zoology Department, University of Florida bolker@zoo.ufl.edu (352) 392-5697 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.htm...

...ith the description at the top of the help page -- it does not promise to stop evaluation once the first non-TRUE is found. That seems OK to me -- if you want sequencing you can use stopifnot(A) stopifnot(B) or stopifnot(A && B) I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than twisting the code into knots. Best, luke On Mon, 15 May 2017, Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>> Serguei Sokol <sokol at insa-toulouse.fr> >>>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:32:20 +0200 writ...

Hi there, Does anyone know if R has a function for testing whether a time series is stationary?? Thanks in advance, Wayne Dr Wayne R. Jones Statistician / Research Analyst KSS Group plc St James's Buildings 79 Oxford Street Manchester M1 6SS Tel: +44(0)161 609 4084 Mob: +44(0)7810 523 713 KSS Ltd A division of Knowledge Support Systems Group plc Seventh Floor St James's

...ed it. I do tend agree with Herv? and Serguei here. > If stopifnot() cannot be revisited > to do "sequencing" then that means I will need to revisit all my calls > to stopifnot(). >> >> I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn >> case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than >> twisting the code into knots. Interesting... but really differing from the current documentation, > Why not. Still better than the current situation. But only if that > semantic seems more...

Hello, 1. The Situation : ------------------------ The stack traceback is not available when error ouccured in a try(....) -- test.R -------------------------------- f<-function(a){ return ( log(a) ) } try(f("A")) traceback() ------------------------------------------- I get the following message : > try(f("A")) Error in log(x) : Non-numeric argument to mathematical

...conciseness of the error message are the features that made me adopt stopifnot() in the 1st place. If stopifnot() cannot be revisited to do "sequencing" then that means I will need to revisit all my calls to stopifnot(). > > I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn > case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than > twisting the code into knots. Why not. Still better than the current situation. But only if that semantic seems more useful to people. Would be sad if usefulness of one semantic or the other was decided based on trickin...

...h Herv? and Serguei here. > > > If stopifnot() cannot be revisited > > to do "sequencing" then that means I will need to revisit all my calls > > to stopifnot(). > > >> > >> I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn > >> case reports _all_ that fail; that would seem more useful to me than > >> twisting the code into knots. > > Interesting... but really differing from the current documentation, > > > Why not. Still better than the current situation. But only if that &gt...

Le 15/05/2017 ? 15:37, Martin Maechler a ?crit : >>>>>> Serguei Sokol <sokol at insa-toulouse.fr> >>>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes: > > I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass. > > So, here is the code: > > [....... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to > the current