search for: stopifnot

By not using 'withCallingHandler' or 'tryCatch', the state is like 'stopifnot' in R 3.4.x. If 'stopifnot' becomes faster than in R 3.4.x when the expressions given to 'stopifnot' are all TRUE, it is because 'match.call' is not called. Credit is to https://github.com/HenrikBengtsson/Wishlist-for-R/issues/70 for the idea. Speaking about 'match....

In current definition of function 'stopifnot' in stop.R in R 3.6.0 beta (https://svn.r-project.org/R/branches/R-3-6-branch/src/library/base/R/stop.R) or R devel (https://svn.r-project.org/R/trunk/src/library/base/R/stop.R), if 'exprs' is specified, cl[[1]] is quote(stopifnot) . To be more robust, quote(base::stopifnot) may be used...

I think Herv?'s idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C. I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this: Stopifnot <- function(...) { n <- length(match.call()) - 1 for (i in 1:n) { nm <...

R-1.7.0 built on NetBSD 1.6, but the validation test suite failed: Machinetype: Intel Pentium III (600 MHz); NetBSD 1.6 (GENERIC) Remote gcc version: gcc (GCC) 3.2.2 Remote g++ version: g++ (GCC) 3.2.2 Configure environment: CC=gcc CXX=g++ LDFLAGS=-Wl,-rpath,/usr/local/lib make[5]: Entering directory `/local/build/R-1.7.0/src/library' >>> Building/Updating

>From https://github.com/HenrikBengtsson/Wishlist-for-R/issues/70 : ... and follow up note from 2018-03-15: Ouch... in R-devel, stopifnot() has become yet 4-5 times slower; ... which is due to a complete rewrite using tryCatch() and withCallingHandlers(). >From https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2017-May/074256.html , it seems that 'tryCatch' was used to avoid the following example from giving error message with ...

...mpiler) enableJIT(0) f <- function(x) for (i in 1) {x; eval(expression(i))} f(is.numeric(y)) # Error: object 'y' not found fc <- cmpfun(f) fc(is.numeric(y)) # Error: object 'y' not found Is this accidental feature going to be relied upon? "Details" section of 'stopifnot' documentation in current R 3.6.0 alpha (https://svn.r-project.org/R/branches/R-3-6-branch/src/library/base/man/stopifnot.Rd) has this. ? Since \R version 3.6.0, \code{stopifnot()} no longer handles potential ? errors or warnings (by \code{\link{tryCatch}()} etc) for each single ? expression b...

Here is a patch to function 'stopifnot' that adds 'evaluated' argument and makes 'exprs' argument in 'stopifnot' like 'exprs' argument in 'withAutoprint'. --- stop.R 2019-05-30 14:01:15.282197286 +0000 +++ stop_new.R 2019-05-30 14:01:51.372187466 +0000 @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ .Internal(sto...

My points: - The 'withCallingHandlers' construct that is used in current 'stopifnot' code has no effect. Without it, the warning message is the same. The overridden warning is not raised. The original warning stays. - Overriding call in error and warning to 'cl.i' doesn't always give better outcome. The original call may be "narrower" than 'cl.i'....

...an be used in place of match.call() . --------------------------- >>>>> peter dalgaard <pdalgd at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:28:42 +0200 writes: > I think Herv?'s idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C. if he just meant that, then "yes, of course" (but not so interesting). > I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this: Somethin...

...>> The current behavior is consistent with 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) > My main use case for using stopifnot() is argument checking. In that > context, I like the conciseness of > stopifnot( > A, > B, > ... &g...

...4837 43.4125593 37.4695915 41.858589 78.742174 10 is.unsorted(x.posixct.sort) 36.966654 37.031975 51.1228686 37.1235380 37.777319 153.270170 10 Since there do not appear to be any tests for is.unsorted() these are some tests to be added for some types. # integer sequence x <- -10L:10L stopifnot(!is.unsorted(x, na.rm = F, strictly = T)) stopifnot(!is.unsorted(x, na.rm = F, strictly = F)) # integer not strictly x <- -10L:10L x[2] <- x[3] stopifnot( is.unsorted(x, na.rm = F, strictly = T)) stopifnot(!is.unsorted(x, na.rm = F, strictly = F)) # integer with NA x <- -10L:10L x[2] <-...

If an expression is passed to stopifnot() which contains missing values, then the resulting error message is somewhat baffling until you are used to it, e.g. > x <- y <- rep(TRUE, 10) > y[7] <- NA > stopifnot(x, y) Error in if (!(is.logical(r <- eval(ll[[i]])) && all(r))) stop(paste(deparse(mc[[i + : m...

[R 1.7.1 on Windows XP Pro] Since R allows missing values for character variables, why are NA's not propagated by character manipulation functions? For example: > temp <- c("a", NA) > temp [1] "a" NA > is.na(temp) [1] FALSE TRUE > paste(temp[1], temp[2]) [1] "a NA" > substr(temp, 1, 1) [1] "a" "N" >

This is getting pretty convoluted. The current behavior is consistent with 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: >>>>>> S...

Hello, I stumbled over a problem: stopifnot(m1 == m2) It works with vector or matrix, but does not work for classes from Matrix package. In the source of stopifnot(), there is all(m1 == m2) that would just work, but there is also is.logical(m1 == m2) that id FALSE. Would it be possible if Matrix package redefined stopifnot() ? (If there...

I am using a variant of stopifnot a lot. can I suggest that base R extends its functionality? I know how to do this for myself. this is a suggestion for beginners and students. I don't think it would break anything. first, I think it would be more useful if it had an optional character string, so users could write stopi...

Hello, On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 09:30:59AM -0700, William Dunlap wrote: > Why don't you use > stopifnot( all(m1 == m2) ) > ? good question. Even though I use aseert np.all(m1 == m2) when working with NumPy, I got accustomed to the "handy shortcut" that I can omit all() with R vectors and matrices. Then I got trapped with the thing I reported. On a second thought, omitting all() mi...

Hi, It's surprising that stopifnot() keeps evaluating its arguments after it reaches the first one that is not TRUE: > stopifnot(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) Error: 3 == 5 is not TRUE In addition: Warning message: In stopifnot(3 == 5, as.integer(2^32), a <- 12) : NAs introduced by coercion to integer...

...rote: > This is getting pretty convoluted. > > The current behavior is consistent with 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) My main use case for using stopifnot() is argument checking. In that context, I like the conciseness of stopifnot( A, B, ... ) I think it's a common use case (and a pretty natural thing to do) to order...

Another possible shortcut definition: assert <- function(exprs) do.call("stopifnot", list(exprs = substitute(exprs), local = parent.frame())) After thinking again, I propose to use ??? ? ? stop(simpleError(msg, call = if(p <- sys.parent()) sys.call(p))) - It seems that the call is the call of the frame where stopifnot(...) is evaluated. Because that is the correct cont...