search for: formales

Hi, Thanks for the note. How would explain the following snippet taken from `formals` doc page (the code comment is also from that doc) ? ## formals returns NULL for primitive functions. Use it in combination with ## args for this case. is.primitive(`+`) formals(`+`) formals(args(`+`)) Le sam. 6 oct. 2018 ? 13:42, Rui Barradas <ruipbarradas at sapo.pt> a ?crit :

Hi, A short code example showing the warning might the only thing needed here: ``` > formals(args(`[`)) NULL *Warning message:In formals(fun) : argument is not a function* > is.function(`[`) [1] TRUE > is.primitive(`[`) [1] TRUE ``` Now with an other primitive: ``` > formals(args(`sum`)) $... $na.rm [1] FALSE > is.function(`sum`) [1] TRUE > is.primitive(`sum`) [1] TRUE

Full_Name: Jörg Polzehl Version: 1.8.0 OS: Windows XP Submission from: (NULL) (62.141.176.1) I encountered a problem when playing with the mle library and specifying negative starting values for the parameters. The reason seems to be an incorrect behaviour of function formals: glike<-function(a=1,b=1,c=1) a > formals(glike) $a [1] 1 $b [1] 1 $c [1] 1 > unlist(formals(glike)) a b c

With 0.63.3, try test <- function(){ fn <- function(a) print("hello") print(is.function(fn)) print(names(formals("fn")))} test() if fn is not quoted in the last line of test, it works properly. test <- function(){ fn <- function() print("hello") formals(fn) <- alist(a=,b=) return(fn)} formals(test()) now try with line 3 of test changed to

First, here's the specific bug I have. Later I'll say why I care. > ls(zappo) Error in try(name) : object "zappo" not found # good. > f = function(zappo) { function(y) zappo + y } > g = f(1) > g(1) [1] 2 > formals(g) $y > formals(g)$y > formals(g)$y = 2 > g function (y = 2) zappo + y > g(1) Error in g(1) : object "zappo" not found

Hi, The R input/output after the following paragraph is from a session with version.string R version 2.4.0 Patched (2006-11-23 r39958). The last element, x$c, of x has no value and after the assignment of x to the formals of f, x$c does not become a formal argument of f. The second assignment does the job. It seems that x$c actually becomes the body of f after the first assignment. There is no

Hi, I am a little bit surprised by the following output of 'formals'. Is this the intended behavior? > f <- function(a=1,b=-1) { a+b } > class(formals(f)$a) [1] "numeric" > class(formals(f)$b) [1] "call" Josef -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Josef Leydold | WU (Vienna University of Economics and

Have I correctly inferred below, how I build IR and debug info for a function type and a function (value), in particular, how to supply the names of the formal parameters? To create a function in llvm IR and give names to its formal parameters, I must: 1. Build a LLVMTypeRef for the type of each formal and the function result. 2. Build a function type using LLVMFunctionType, from the results of

Just checking in to see whether it is intended or not that assigning new formals to a function/closure causes any attributes to be dropped: EXAMPLE: > fcn <- structure(function() {}, foo="foo", class=c("foo")) > str(fcn) function () - attr(*, "srcref")=Class 'srcref' atomic [1:8] 1 18 1 30 18 30 1 1 .. ..- attr(*, "srcfile")=Classes

This code which has worked for years in R but fails under R-devel: > R.version.string [1] "R Under development (unstable) (2012-07-25 r59963)" > > n <- 3 > f <- function(x) {} > formals(f) <- rep(formals(f), n) ## Error in rep(formals(f), n) : replication of pairlists is defunct The message suggests that the change was intentional. Why was this functionality

? Sat, 17 Feb 2024 11:15:43 -0700 "Reed A. Cartwright" <racartwright at gmail.com> ?????: > I'm wrapping a function in R and I want to record all the arguments > passed to it, including default values and missing values. This is hard if not impossible to implement for the general case because the default arguments are evaluated in the environment of the function as it

I'm proposing to signal an error (from R >= 3.3.0) in such examples -- which do "work" in R 3.2.x and earlier : > f <- NULL; body(f) <- quote(sin(a+1)); f function () sin(a + 1) <environment: 0x48f9798> > g <- NULL; formals(g) <- alist(x = pi, y=); g function (x = pi, y) NULL <environment: 0x4e6dfe8> > The proposal is that the underlying C

Hi all, What's the official name for the value that represents a missing argument? e.g. formals(plot)$x str(formals(plot)$x) deparse(formals(plot)$x) is.symbol(formals(plot)$x) What's the correct way to create an object like this? (for example if you are manipulating the formals of a function to add an argument with no default value, as in http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3892580/).

Hi, I have a tiny question about the graphics change in R 2.7.0. If I write a script ? la: options(device="pdf") formals(pdf)[c("file","onefile","width","height")] <- list("~/Rplot %03d.pdf", FALSE, 8, 8) plot(3) plot(4) both plots will be written into ONE pdf file. (not two as expected) This worked fine under 2.6.x In R 2.7.0 I

Hello, I don't see why you say that the documentation seems to be wrong: class(args(`+`)) #[1] "function" args() on a primitive does return a closure. At least in this case it does. Rui Barradas ?s 14:05 de 07/10/2018, Peter Dalgaard escreveu: > There is more "fun" afoot here, but I don't recall what the point may be: > >> args(get("+"))

Hi, I don't find the formal definition of "declare", although it is used in ~300 hundred of places. Do I miss something? If it is not formally defined, should it be defined? Thanks. https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html -- Regards, Peng

The assignment form of 'formals' strips attributes (or something close to that) from the values in the list. This wasn't intentional, was it? The current behavior (2.0.0 through 2.1.0 on Windows at least): > fjj <- function() x > formals(fjj) <- list(x=c(a=2, b=4)) > fjj function (x = c(2, 4)) x Previous behavior: > fjj <- function() x > formals(fjj)

after this setClass("A") setGeneric("bar", function(x, y) standardGeneric("bar")) setMethod(bar, signature(x="A", y="A"), function(x, y) {}) setMethod(bar, signature(x="A", y="ANY"), function(x, y) {}) the method for signature c("A", "A") contains package information > str(getMethod(bar,

On Jan 28, 2015, at 6:37 PM, Michael Lawrence <lawrence.michael at gene.com> wrote: > At this point I would just due: > > formals(body(method)[[2L]]) > > At some point we need to figure out what to do with this .local() confusion. Agreed, definitely. The current hack is to avoid re-matching arguments on method dispatch, so a fix would need to be fairly deep in the

Dear list, I'm facing an issue with the automated documentation of a function using roxygen2. The function has a complex-valued default argument, which is picked up by roxygen2 using formals() to generate the corresponding Usage section of the Rd file. Unfortunately, it appears that formals() reformats complex numbers. Consider the example below, test <- function(a = 1+2i){} >