similar to: symbol name caching bug: attributes get tied to symbol names

Calling parse(text=quote(name)) or text=as.name("name") makes parse() prompt for input from the command line and then it returns a parse of the initial characters of 'name' (depending on how many characters were typed at the prompt). E.g., > parse(text=quote(myName)) ?1/3 expression(myN) attr(,"srcfile") <text> >

Both of the following should return NA, but do not in "R version 2.11.0 Under development (unstable) (2010-03-07 r51225)" on 32-bit Windows: > mean(c(1,10,100,NA), trim=.1) Error in sort.int(x, partial = unique(c(lo, hi))) : index 4 outside bounds > mean(c(1,10,100,NA), trim=.26) [1] 55 With na.rm=TRUE they give the correct results. (mean() would be so much simpler

Should both parts of a complex number be printed to the same precision? The imaginary part of 0 looks a bit odd when log10(real/imag) >=~ getOption("digits"), but I'm not sure it is awful. Some people might expect the same number of significant digits in the two parts. > 1e7+4i [1] 10000000+0i > 1e7+5i [1] 10000000+0i > 1e10 + 1000i [1] 1e+10+0e+00i >

It looks like the 'seq' variable to 'for' can be altered from within the loop, leading to incorrect answers. E.g., in the following I'd expect 'sum' to be 1+2=3, but R 2.10.0 (svn 48686) gives 44.5. > x = c(1,2); sum = 0; for (i in x) { x[i+1] = i + 42.5; sum = sum + i }; sum [1] 44.5 or, with a debugging cat()s, > x = c(1,2); sum = 0; for (i in x) {

I think the following rather wierd expressions show a problem in how some of the .Primitive functions evaluate their arguments. I haven't yet thought of a way that a nonabusive user might run into this problem. In each case the first argument, x, is modified in the course of evaluating the second argument and then modified x gets used as the first argument: > x<-as.integer(1:5); y

I was looking for all the glm-related 'family' functions in stats using the following predicate that returns TRUE for any function whose first argument is called "link". is.family <- function(object) is.function(object) && identical(names(as.list(object))[1], "link") It threw an error when applied to SSfol > is.family(SSfol) Error in

TIBCO Software Inc. today launched TIBCO Spotfire 3.1, the latest version of its in-memory analytics platform, making predictive analytics based on R & S+ accessible within Spotfire's visual user experience. With this release, R & S+ users will be able to share and deploy their scripts through the Spotfire platform, making advanced analytics accessible to Business Analysts. While R

The following example involves a function whose on.exit() expression both generates an error and catches the error. The body of the function also generates an error. When calling the function wrapped in a tryCatch, should that tryCatch's error function be given the error from the body of the function, since the one from the on.exit has already been dealt with? Currently the outer tryCatch

ANALYTICS CONSULTANT Hiring Manager: Michael O'Connell Location: East Coast US TIBCO is a rapidly growing software company with more than 3000 employees worldwide and approx. $900MM annual revenue in 2011. TIBCO provides a comprehensive software platform that allows customers to perform in-depth analysis on their data, while injecting predictive and complex statistics in the analysis. TIBCO

DATA SCIENTIST Location: EU TIBCO is a rapidly growing software company with more than 3000 employees worldwide and more than$1B annual revenue in 2012. TIBCO provides a comprehensive software platform that allows customers to perform in-depth analysis on their data, while injecting predictive and complex statistics in the analysis. TIBCO Spotfire is an interactive, visual environment with

DATA SCIENTIST Hiring Manager: Michael O???Connell Location: US TIBCO is a rapidly growing software company with more than 3000 employees worldwide and more than$1B annual revenue in 2012. TIBCO provides a comprehensive software platform that allows customers to perform in-depth analysis on their data, while injecting predictive and complex statistics in the analysis. TIBCO Spotfire is an

DATA SCIENTIST Hiring Manager: Michael O'Connell Location: US TIBCO is a rapidly growing software company with more than 3000 employees worldwide and more than $1B annual revenue in 2012. TIBCO provides a comprehensive software platform that allows customers to perform in-depth analysis on their data, while injecting predictive and complex statistics in the analysis. TIBCO Spotfire is an

We are looking for two Analytics Consultants (PhD in Statistics with significant R programming skills preferred) to join our rapidly growing TIBCO Analytic Solutions team. The successful candidates will work closely with our TIBCO / Spotfire implementation and development teams to provide analytics expertise for customer pilots and implementations, methodology/training and product/code

One of our R users here just showed me the following problem while investigating the return value of a while loop. I added some information on a similar bug in for loops. I think he was using 2.9.0 but I see the same problem on today's development version of 2.10.0 (svn 48703). Should the semantics of while and for loops be changed slightly to avoid the memory buildup that fixing this to

I left out the warning - it's still there. The output object is malformed but either +.factor should prevent this or match() should check. Hadley On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 3:50 PM, William Dunlap <wdunlap at tibco.com> wrote: > Did you leave out the warning from "+", which should be an error, > as it produces an illegal ordered factor in this case and factor+factor >

TIBCO is a rapidly growing software company with more than 3000 employees worldwide and approx. $900MM annual revenue in 2011. TIBCO provides a comprehensive software platform that allows customers to perform in-depth analysis on their data, while injecting predictive and complex statistics in the analysis. TIBCO Spotfire is an interactive, visual environment with inbuilt S+ analytics and

Shouldn't the following 4 ways to alter an object in a locked environment either all work or all fail? (All working would be nice, I think.) E <- new.env() assign("var", c(1,2,3,4), envir=E) lockEnvironment(E, bindings=FALSE) E$var[1] <- 101 ; E$var #[1] 101 2 3 local(var[2] <- 102, envir=E) #Error in eval(expr, envir, enclos) : # cannot add

Consider the following expression, in which we pass 'i=', with no value given for the 'i' argument, to lapply. lapply("x", function(i, j) c(i=missing(i),j=missing(j), i=) >From R-2.14.0 (2011-10-31) through R-3.4.4 (2018-03-15) this evaluated to c(i=TRUE, j=FALSE). From R-3.5.0 (2018-04-23) through R-4.0.0 (2020-04-24) this evaluated to c(i=FALSE, j=TRUE). Was

Would introducing the new frame, with the call to local(), cause problems when you use frame counting instead of <<- to modify variables outside the scope of lapply's FUN, I think the frame counts may have to change. E.g., here is code from actuar::simul() that might be affected: x <- unlist(lapply(nodes[[i]], seq)) lapply(nodes[(i + 1):(nlevels - 1)],

Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Óscar Fuentes<ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: >> Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Óscar Fuentes<ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: >>>> While compiling some sources, translating from my compiler's IR to LLVM