Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "uneval_after_return".
2020 Nov 20
2
return (x+1) * 1000
...are already R CMD CHECK checks for this kind of thing (I
wasnt sure but I'm hearing from others there may be/are) that may be
(and/or may need to be) sufficient.
~G
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM D?nes T?th <toth.denes at kogentum.hu> wrote:
> Or even more illustratively:
>
> uneval_after_return <- function(x) {
> return(x) * stop("Not evaluated")
> }
> uneval_after_return(1)
> # [1] 1
>
> On 11/20/20 10:12 PM, Mateo Obreg?n wrote:
> > Dear r-developers-
> >
> > After many years of using and coding in R and other languages, I came
> ac...
2020 Nov 20
2
return (x+1) * 1000
...gt; > (and/or may need to be) sufficient.
> >
> > ~G
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM D?nes T?th <toth.denes at kogentum.hu
> > <mailto:toth.denes at kogentum.hu>> wrote:
> >
> > Or even more illustratively:
> >
> > uneval_after_return <- function(x) {
> > return(x) * stop("Not evaluated")
> > }
> > uneval_after_return(1)
> > # [1] 1
> >
> > On 11/20/20 10:12 PM, Mateo Obreg?n wrote:
> > > Dear r-developers-
> > >
> > &...
2020 Nov 21
1
return (x+1) * 1000
...;>>> ~G
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM D?nes T?th <toth.denes at kogentum.hu
>>>> <mailto:toth.denes at kogentum.hu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Or even more illustratively:
>>>>
>>>> uneval_after_return <- function(x) {
>>>> return(x) * stop("Not evaluated")
>>>> }
>>>> uneval_after_return(1)
>>>> # [1] 1
>>>>
>>>> On 11/20/20 10:12 PM, Mateo Obreg?n wrote:
>>>> >...
2020 Nov 20
5
return (x+1) * 1000
Dear r-developers-
After many years of using and coding in R and other languages, I came across
something that I think should be flagged by the parser:
bug <- function (x) {
return (x + 1) * 1000
}
> bug(1)
[1] 2
The return() call is not like any other function call that returns a value to
the point where it was called from. I think this should straightforwardly be
handled in the
2020 Nov 20
0
return (x+1) * 1000
...from others there may be/are) that may be
> (and/or may need to be) sufficient.
>
> ~G
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM D?nes T?th <toth.denes at kogentum.hu
> <mailto:toth.denes at kogentum.hu>> wrote:
>
> Or even more illustratively:
>
> uneval_after_return <- function(x) {
> ? ?return(x) * stop("Not evaluated")
> }
> uneval_after_return(1)
> # [1] 1
>
> On 11/20/20 10:12 PM, Mateo Obreg?n wrote:
> > Dear r-developers-
> >
> > After many years of using and coding in...
2020 Nov 21
0
return (x+1) * 1000
...> > >
> > > ~G
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM D?nes T?th <toth.denes at kogentum.hu
> > > <mailto:toth.denes at kogentum.hu>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Or even more illustratively:
> > >
> > > uneval_after_return <- function(x) {
> > > return(x) * stop("Not evaluated")
> > > }
> > > uneval_after_return(1)
> > > # [1] 1
> > >
> > > On 11/20/20 10:12 PM, Mateo Obreg?n wrote:
> > > > Dear r-developers-
&...