similar to: .doTrace problem with eval.parent(substitute(expr)) vs. lazy evaluation of expr

Hello, I was playing around with the newly implemented 'incomparables' argument in 'match' and realized the argument does not behave anything like I expected. Can someone explain what is going on here? Sorry if I'm misreading the documentation. > match(1:3, 1:3, incomparables=1) [1] NA 2 3 # This seems right, the 1 in 'x' is 'incomparable' >

Hi, On 01/23/2015 07:01 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Michael Lawrence wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:44 AM, <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote: >>> >>> For default methods there ought to be a way to create those so the >>> default method is computed at creation or load time and stored in an >>>

I came across the below mis-feature/bug using match with POSIXlt objects (from strptime) in R 2.11.1 (though this appears to be an old issue). > x <- as.POSIXlt(Sys.Date()) > table <- as.POSIXlt(Sys.Date()+0:5) > length(x) [1] 1 > x %in% table # I expect TRUE [1] FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE > match(x, table) # I expect 1 [1] NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

On 06/11/2015 7:36 AM, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. wrote: > I am currently puzzled by a seach path behavior. I have a library of a dozen routines > getlabs(), getssn(), getecg(), ... that interface to local repositories and pull back > patient information. All have a the first 6 arguments in common, and immediately call a > second routine to do initial processing of these 6. The

On 12/04/2024 8:15 a.m., Iago Gin? V?zquez wrote: > Hi all, I am trying to debug an error of a function g defined and used inside another function f of a package. > So I have > > f <- function(whatever){ > ... > g <- function(whatever2){ > ... > } > ... > } > > If I wanted to debug some thing directly inside f I would do debug(f).

Hi, I have a problem with function match. I might not be using it properly? I have two character vectors that contain a unique identifier: gtype_prochi <- ("CAO1524452" "CAO0966182" "CAO9209719" "CAO4436178" "CAO3761898" "CAO3529266" "CAO2427148" "CAO8829776" "CAO2517174" "CAO5371418"

>From 8fb8c285e69c0f4cde28061019a8e399641d5ef1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shao Miller <shao.miller at yrdsb.edu.on.ca> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:27:56 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] [memdisk] Additional comments in memdisk.inc and postprocess.pl Just a sprinkling of comments adding further description to the code. --- memdisk/memdisk.inc | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------

Hello, It's several days I try to track this bug, and even cannot cook a reproducible example. Yet, it occurs consistently in a long-running task after a variable period of time. Here is an example: ... my long-running code [as I said, cannot give something simple that produces this bug in a reproducible manner] Error in match(x, table, nomatch = 0L) : formal argument

# The result I am after is the result after a substitution in an expression, such as substitute(expression(a+b+c), list(a=1)) expression(1 + b + c) # However, the way I want to do it is for a an expression "stored as a variable" as (expr <- expression(a+b+c)) expression(a + b + c) # a) The following does not work (expr2 <- substitute(expr, list(a=1))) expr # b) - whereas this

I am currently puzzled by a seach path behavior. I have a library of a dozen routines getlabs(), getssn(), getecg(), ... that interface to local repositories and pull back patient information. All have a the first 6 arguments in common, and immediately call a second routine to do initial processing of these 6. The functions "joe" and "fred" below capture the relevant

I have a for-loop in my code that calls another .R file: source("estimation.R") This file runs through without any problems, so the program completes the loop one time. However, when the loop starts a second time and it comes time to call the file "estimation.R" again, program stops and prints the following error message: "Error in eval.with.vis(expr, envir, enclos) :

I am working with a largish dataset of 25k lines and I am now tying to use predict. pred = predict(cuDataGlmModel, length + meanPitch + minimumPitch + maximumPitch + meanF1 + meanF2 + meanF3 + meanF4 + meanF5 + ratioF1ToF2 + rationF3ToF1 + jitter + shimmer + percentUnvoicedFrames + numberOfVoiceBreaks + percentOfVoiceBreaks + meanIntensity + minimumIntensity + maximumIntensity +

Dear all I tried to use regression to predicted mu data, but it has error like this: > IWJR.complete x y [1,] 33.17635 2.4705021 [2,] 81.61225 3.3815620 [3,] 65.47392 1.6518975 [4,] 57.97806 1.6110785 [5,] 76.05528 2.1601246 [6,] 41.36090 1.5498132 [7,] 68.77844 2.8078691 [8,] 55.57040 2.1183063 [9,] 41.29287 1.8015709 [10,] 65.43935 2.3483183 [11,] 22.44821

I am absolutely new to R and I am aware of only a few basic command lines. I was running a robust regression in R, using the following command line library (MASS) rfdmodel1 <- rlm (TotalEmployment_2004 ~ MISSISSIPPI + LOUISIANA + TotalEmployment_2000 + PCWhitePop_2004 + UnemploymentRate_2004 + PCUrbanPop2000 + PCPeopleWithACollegeDegree_2000 + PCPopulation.of.or.over.65.years.of.age_2004)

> datafilename="E:/my documents/r/sex/bysex1.csv" > data.sex=read.table(datafilename,header=T) > data.sex y.sex.age.region.c.n 1 1980,F,A,N,-18.15,13.61 2 1980,F,A,N,-18.61,13.04 3 1980,F,A,N,-18.81,12.32 4 1990,F,A,N,-21.12,11.7 5 1990,F,A,N,-20.77,11.58 6 1990,F,A,N,-21.6,13.34 7 1990,F,A,N,-21.78,12.6 > model.anova<-aov(c~age*sex,data=data.sex)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Bryant, Thanks for your reply. It didn't work immediately, I had to create a second context, or else it was looping between the second and first line. This seems to work: [earlydial] ; Test Early Dial exten => _.,1,Set(l_Extension=${EXTEN}) exten => _.,n,Goto(earlydial2,${l_Extension},1) [earlydial2] exten => _.,n,Goto(noMatch,1)

I do think keeping the default behavior is desirable for backwards compatibility; my suggestion is not to change default behavior but to add an optional argument that allows a different behavior. Although this can be implemented in a user-defined function, retaining empty matches facilitates programmatic use, and seems to be something that should be available in base R. It is available, for

Hi.. i have an expression of the form: model1<-nls(y~beta1*(x1+(k1*x2)+(k1*k1*x3)+(k2*x4)+(k2*k1*x5)+(k2*k2*x6)+(k3*x7)+(k3*k4*x8)+(k3*k2*x9)+(k3*k3*x10)+ (k4*x11)+(k4*k1*x12)+(k4*k2*x13)+(k4*k3*x14)+(k4*k4*x15)+(k5*x16)+(k5*k1*x17)+(k5*k2*x18)+(k5*k3*x19)+

When I run R CMD check R.oo on R v2.7.0 devel (2008-03-04 r44677) on WinXP I get the following error while testing examples: Error in match(x, table, nomatch = 0) : formal argument "nomatch" matched by multiple actual arguments Calls: setMethodS3 -> setMethodS3.default -> %in% -> match Execution halted How is that even possible with: > get("%in%") function (x,

I don't care much for regmatches and haven't tried strextract, but I think replacing the character(0) by NA_character_ is almost always inappropriate if the match information comes from gregexpr. I think strcapture() does a pretty good job of what I think you are trying to do. Perhaps adding an argument to map no match to NA instead of "" would give you just what you wanted.