search for: rematched

...<- 1:5 > myvec + mymat [,1] [,2] [1,] 2 9 [2,] 4 11 [3,] 6 13 [4,] 8 15 [5,] 10 12 [6,] 7 14 Warning message: In myvec + mymat : longer object length is not a multiple of shorter object length > Regarding -The arguments in the call to the generic are rematched with the -arguments for the method using the standard argument matching mechanism. -The first argument, i.e.@: the object, will have been evaluated. - this information is duplicated. See a few paragraphs up "When the method is invoked it is called..." Scott -- Scott Kostyshak Economic...

...;nonConformingMethod" for method definitions that > diverge in the argument list. > > 2. the internal dispatch code checks the class of the selected definition > (this can likely be done with little cost in the standard case). In the > case of non-conforming, the arguments are rematched to define the method's > other arguments. > > The possibilities need examining, but my feeling is that the re-matching > should happen in the current frame, as opposed to doing a new call. > > There is a fair amount of code, for example in callNextMethod, that > requires so...

I wish it didn't have to depend on the name '.local'. Back when I wrote a lot of S4 methods I avoided the auto-generated .local and named the local function something that made sense so that is was easier for a user to track down the source of an error. E.g., define the generic QQQ with numeric and integer methods: setGeneric("QQQ", function(x, ...)NULL)

Hi, while playing with the `methods' package I was not able to find what the recommended way of dealing with the following problem is. Suppose there is a generic function `foo' and two functions `foo.default' and `foo.formula', in the classical way: foo <- function(y, ...) UseMethod("foo") foo.default <- function(y, ...) {} foo.formula <- function(formula,

...have a class, say "nonConformingMethod" for method definitions that diverge in the argument list. 2. the internal dispatch code checks the class of the selected definition (this can likely be done with little cost in the standard case). In the case of non-conforming, the arguments are rematched to define the method's other arguments. The possibilities need examining, but my feeling is that the re-matching should happen in the current frame, as opposed to doing a new call. There is a fair amount of code, for example in callNextMethod, that requires some computations using knowledge o...

> If we don't care about trying to optimize out overflow checks in > InstCombine, I'd go with moving the complexity to CGP. I think instcombine should optimize out overflow checks (as it does today) without introducing _with_overflow calls. Are there reasons why such an approach would not work? > However, I think > InstCombine is doing the right thing here by forming these.

I have some questions about S4 style methods and generics. First of all, is there any way of using default values for arguments in the generics/methods? My own experiments show that such arguments are always ignored. The green book seems to be silent on this matter. The second question is about using a non-trivial function body for generics. Page 351 of the green book gives an example of this

On Friday, 26 June 2020 10.47.13 WEST I?aki Ucar wrote: > I used bcond locally and wrongly assumed that fedpkg build would > support --with BCOND and --without BCOND. Instead, the way to activate > it is to change to "%bcond_with check" and then revert to > "%bcond_without check". The only difference with bootstrap is that > "bootstrap" is recognized

I am trying to read a number of XML files using xmlTreeParse(). Unfortunately, some of them are malformed in a way that makes R crash. The problem is that closing tags are sometimes repeated like this: <tag>value1</tag><tag>value2</tag>some garbage</tag></tag><tag>value3</tag> I want to preprocess the contents of the XML file using gsub() before

Hi, After loading R 4.0.0 on Ubuntu 20.04. R version 4.0.0 (2020-04-24) -- "Arbor Day" Copyright (C) 2020 The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (64-bit) R is free software and comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. You are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. Type 'license()' or 'licence()'

FYI, I plan on implementing this for F31 if no issues arise. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ben Cotton <bcotton at redhat.com> Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 10:55 Subject: Fedora 31 System-Wide change proposal: Automatic R runtime dependencies To: <devel-announce at lists.fedoraproject.org>, Development discussions related to Fedora <devel at lists.fedoraproject.org>

(opening new bug report thread, on suggestion of BDR ..) I said on vaguely related topic: MM> There's another long-standing MM> UseMethod / NextMethod / Dispatch problem that I've never traced/solved.. MM> MM> Look at the $RHOME/tests/mode-methods.R file ! Peter Dalgaard already remarked : PD> ..i.e. this: PD> abc <- function(x, ...) { PD> if

The build system rolled up R-3.5.0.tar.gz (codename "Joy in Playing") this morning. The list below details the changes in this release. You can get the source code from http://cran.r-project.org/src/base/R-3/R-3.5.0.tar.gz or wait for it to be mirrored at a CRAN site nearer to you. Binaries for various platforms will appear in due course. For the R Core Team, Peter Dalgaard

The build system rolled up R-3.5.0.tar.gz (codename "Joy in Playing") this morning. The list below details the changes in this release. You can get the source code from http://cran.r-project.org/src/base/R-3/R-3.5.0.tar.gz or wait for it to be mirrored at a CRAN site nearer to you. Binaries for various platforms will appear in due course. For the R Core Team, Peter Dalgaard

Hi, I''m having problems with this configuration: iptables 1.3.7 (vanilla or repackaged for fc5) kernel 2.6.19 (vanilla) ROUTE 1.11 (last pom-ng) layer7-filter 2.6 (last in sf.net) connlimit (last pom-ng) When I try to use -j ROUTE in any chain in mangle table I have this error: [root@myhost ~]# iptables -v -t mangle -A POSTROUTING -p tcp --dport msnp -j ROUTE --gw