similar to: Re: [R] options()$warn==2 and try() (PR#1570)

Dear R-help folks: Here is my platform: > version platform sparc-sun-solaris2.7 arch sparc os solaris2.7 system sparc, solaris2.7 status major 1 minor 5.0 year 2002 month 04 day 29 language R I have a

Hi, I've been tracking down a memory leak in an rApache application, http://data.vanderbilt.edu/rapache/bbplot. The code was deployed in 2007 and has survived numerous upgrades of both R and rApache (including upgrades and bugs in RMySQL). It's written in such a way so that web crawlers will download every possible URL the app will create. It's not a high-traffic app, but just about

Hi all, I'm working on a GUI frontend for R, and I'm looking for a good way to catch all warning- and error-output. The reason for this is mostly, that I would like to know, which sections of the output are "normal" output, warnings, and errors. This would allow for some nice features, such as highlighting warnings and errors in a different color, or popping up a message

I'd like to propose that the whenever the length of condition passed to an if or a while statement differs from one, an error is produced rather than just a warning as today: > x <- 1:2 > if (x == 1) message("x == 1") x == 1 Warning message: In if (x == 1) message("x == 1") : the condition has length > 1 and only the first element will be used There are

Anyone using the penalised partial likelihood routines in survival5 should update their version. A bug has been fixed in the S package: in coxph() models with penalised likelihood and strata it was possible in some circumstances to get an infinite loop or perhaps an incorrect answer. The new version (2.3) is on cran.r-project.org and will percolate through CRAN in the next few days. -thomas

Anyone using the penalised partial likelihood routines in survival5 should update their version. A bug has been fixed in the S package: in coxph() models with penalised likelihood and strata it was possible in some circumstances to get an infinite loop or perhaps an incorrect answer. The new version (2.3) is on cran.r-project.org and will percolate through CRAN in the next few days. -thomas

Dear R developers, this mail is basically a summary / clarification of some previous mails I sent to this list last week (subject "Catching warning and error output"). Duncan Murdoch pointed out that these were badly organized, and suggested I repost, collecting the main points previously spread out between several mails. Problem statement: In an application embedding R, I would

at lines 651 & 653 (integer_binary function): if (code == DIVOP || code == POWOP) ans = allocVector(REALSXP, n); else ans = allocVector(INTSXP, n); There are calls to warningcall() later in the function, which can trigger garbbage collection. Looks like the typical scenario where it seemed pretty safe to not PROTECT in the original version of the function but

I know - I like to futz. I''m thinking of changing the way I pass optional arguments. This is from EventLog: # Write an event to the event log # Current way el.report_event( "source" => "foo", "category" => 0x2, "event_id" => 0x3, "data" => "Warning! Danger Will Robinson!", "type"

Is there really a need for these complications? Packages emitting this warning are broken by definition and should be fixed. Perhaps we could "flip the switch" in a test environment and see how much havoc is wreaked and whether authors are sufficiently responsive? Michael On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch > wrote: >

I am not sure if this is the right place for that kind of questions, but I wondered that the recommended package survival did not pass R's check procedure without warnings: 1) unbalanced braces: * Rd files with unbalanced braces: * man/Surv.Rd * man/cluster.Rd * man/cox.zph.Rd * man/coxph.Rd * man/coxph.detail.Rd * man/date.ddmmmyy.Rd * man/lines.survfit.Rd *

Hi, I want to fit multiple cox models using the coxph() function. To do this, I use a for-loop and save the relevant results in a separate matrix. In the example below, only two models are fitted (my actual matrix has many more columns), one gives a warning message, while the other does not. Right now, I see all the warning message(s) after the for-loop is completed but have no idea which model

--------- begin included message --------- I tried to compare if cch() and coxph() can generate same result for same case cohort data Use the standard data in cch(): nwtco Since in cch contains the cohort size=4028, while ccoh.data size =1154 after selection, but coxph does not contain info of cohort size=4028. The rough estimate between coxph() and cch() is same, but the lower and upper CI

Hello, I have a couple of questions with regards to fitting a coxph model to a data set in R: I have a very large dataset and wanted to get the baseline hazard using the basehaz() function in the package : 'survival'. If I use all the covariates then the output from basehaz(fit), where fit is a model fit using coxph(), gives 507 unique values for the time and the corresponding cumulative

Dear All, I think there is a typo in the documentation for coxph (library survival). The help says: eps: convergence threshold. Iteration will continue until the relative change in the log-likelihood is less than eps. Default is .0001. However, if I do "coxph.control()" I get: > coxph.control() $eps [1] 1e-09 So the actual eps being used is not 10-4 but

Terry, I recently noticed the censor argument of survfit. For some analyses it greatly reduces the size of the resulting object, which is a nice feature. However, when combined with the id argument, only 1 prediction is made. Predictions can be made individually but I'd prefer to do them all at once if that change can be made. Chris ##################################### # CODE # create

Hi, It is not critical but in case of coxph.null model (~1) extractAIC function generates Warning message: In is.na(fit$coefficients) : is.na() applied to non-(list or vector) of type 'NULL' As I understand it happens because of absent coefficients attribute. Function stats:::extractAIC.coxph Line edf <- sum(!is.na(fit$coefficients)) I think extra null-checking

On 16 October 2015 at 15:17, Robinson, Paul <Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote: > But if > there are new fails, the blame mailer can do a set-difference and report > only the new ones. That would reduce the noise a bit, hmm? Hi Paul, The danger there is that it'd be easier to "get used" to having some failures as long as you don't have "new"

My question is, how to compute hazard function(H(t)) after building the coxph model. I even aware of the terminology that differs from hazard function(H(t)) and the hazard rate(h(t)). Here onward I wish to calculate both. Here what I have done in two different methods; ##########################################################################################

I've never seen this, and have no idea how to reproduce it. For resloution you are going to have to give me a working example of the failure. Also, per the posting guide, what is your sessionInfo()? Terry Therneau On 08/09/2012 04:11 AM, r-help-request at r-project.org wrote: > I have a couple of questions with regards to fitting a coxph model to a data > set in R: > > I have a