similar to: Codetools Query (repost)

Hi the list Is there any tutorial to learn codetools ? It seems to be a very interesting pacakge, but the help gives not that much detail, and there is not that much examples provided... Christophe

I've put together a package codetools with some tools for examining R source code. It is available at http://www.stat.uiowa.edu/~luke/R/codetools/codetools.tar.gz It requires a reasonably current version of R-devel. The main user functions are: checkUsage, checkUsageEnv, checkUsagePackage: Examine closure, closures in an environment, closures in a package, and report

Hello, Is this a bug in codetools: > codetools::showTree( body( glm) ) ("{" (<- call (match.call)) (if (is.character family) (<- family (get family "function" (parent.frame)))) (if (is.function family) (<- family(family))) (if (is.null ($ family family)) ("{" (print family) (stop "'family' not recognized"))) (if (missing data)

This is just a note/wishlist/for the record: With foo1 <- function() { res; } foo2 <- function() { for (i in c()) res <- 1; res; } foo3 <- function() { while (FALSE) res <- 1; res; } foo4 <- function() { if (FALSE) res <- 1; res; } we get: > foo1() Error in foo1() : object 'res' not found > foo2() Error in foo2() : object 'res' not

Dear R Users, Using codetools I obtained the text representation of the parse tree for this snippet z=quote({x[1]<-2}) showTree(z) > ("{" (<- ([ x 1) 2)) (A) If I understand correctly, x[1]<-2 ought to be "[<-"(x,1,2), so shouldn't i see ("{" ( [<- x 1 2 ) ) If indeed the parse tree in (A) is correct, the operation ([ x 1) returns the

In a package, I define a method for not-yet-generic function 'qr.X' like so: > setOldClass("qr") > setMethod("qr.X", signature(qr = "qr"), function(qr, complete, ncol) NULL) The formals of the newly generic 'qr.X' are inherited from the non-generic function in the base namespace. Notably, the inherited default value of formal

After upgrading to R 2.5.1 on Debian, R CMD check gives * checking Rd cross-references ... WARNING Error in .find.package(package, lib.loc) : there is no package called 'codetools' Execution halted * checking for missing documentation entries ... WARNING etc The NEWS file says (for 2.5.0; I was on 2.4 before the recent upgrade) o New recommended package 'codetools' by Luke

Dear list members, I frequently program small scripts and wrap them into functions to be able to check them with checkUsage. In case these functions (loaded via source or copy pasted to the R console) use functions from other packages, I get this error: no visible global function definition for ?xxxxxxx? For example: test = function() { require(plotrix) color.legend() }

Hi Mr Tierney, I have noticed an error message from R 1.12.x's CMD check for a while (apparently prof Ripley completely rewrote CMD check in R 1.12+) e.g.: http://bioconductor.org/checkResults/2.7/bioc-LATEST/snpMatrix/lamb2-checksrc.html ---------------- * checking R code for possible problems ... NOTE Warning: non-unique value when setting 'row.names': ?new? Error in

r-help Forum I'm using the dplyr:: summarize_all(funs(sum)) function and am receiving a warning message that the `funs()` is deprecated as of dplyr 0.8.0. Ok what should I be using to summarize all columns by sum? Jeff [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

The warning gives some suggestions. E.g., replace funs(sum,prod) with list(sum=sum,prod=prod). % R CMD Rscript -e 'library(dplyr,warn.conflicts=FALSE); data.frame(X=1:3,Y=c(11,13,17)) %>% summarize_all(funs(sum,prod))' X_sum Y_sum X_prod Y_prod 1 6 41 6 2431 Warning message: `funs()` is deprecated as of dplyr 0.8.0. Please use a list of either functions or lambdas:

i am getting the following error Error in `contrasts<-`(`*tmp*`, value = contr.funs[1 + isOF[nn]]) : contrasts can be applied only to factors with 2 or more levels can any on e suggest how to rectify [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi there, I have a vector of some functions e.g. #-----------------------------# f.1 <- function(a) { return( a ); } f.2 <- function(a) { return( 1 - (tanh(a))^2 ); } f.3 <- function(a) { return( 1 / (1+exp(-a)) * (1 - (1 / (1+exp(-a)))) ); } func.l <- c(f.1, f.2, f.3); #-----------------------------# and would like to calculate the output value of a function in the vector,

Doing it like this: genericForPrimitive <- function(f, where = topenv(parent.frame()), mustFind = TRUE) { ans = .BasicFunsList[[f]] ## this element may not exist (yet, during loading), dom't test null if(mustFind && identical(ans, FALSE)) stop(gettextf("methods may not be defined for primitive function %s in this version of R",

--xk+LtGr+JJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Attached is a conversion script for converting current R doc files to the proposed new format ... I'm not sure if it handles everything correctly, as I made just some random checks. The main purpose for posting the thing to the list is such that those interested can get a look at the new format. Of

Hi all, The function call series genericForPrimitive -> .findBasicFuns -> .findAll happens 4400 times while the GenomicRanges package is loading. Each time .findAll follows a chain of environments to determine that the methods namespace is the only one that holds a variable called .BasicFunsList. This accounts for ~10% of package loading time. I'm sure there is some history to that

Hello, Any of the two will do, the first is now preferred. library(dplyr) mtcars %>% summarise(across(everything(), sum)) mtcars %>% summarise_all(sum) # no need for `funs()` Hope this helps, Rui Barradas ?s 18:29 de 01/10/20, Jeff Reichman escreveu: > r-help Forum > > > > I'm using the dplyr:: summarize_all(funs(sum)) function and am receiving a >

Hello I need some help in figuring Bravington’s debugger out. Ok I have 2 functions, fun1 and fun2 saved in a ASCII file say filename is funs. Fun1 has a loop which calls fun2, fun2 has a loop which fails and I need to find out the value of the variables of the fun2 and fun1 loops at the specific iteration that fails. Both fun1 and fun2 loops will iterate thousands of times so line by line debug

Hello, I am trying to install R0.99 on my PC running Solairis 7. Here is some text from my shell when I ran 'make check': running `primitive-funs.R' comparing `primitive-funs.Rout' to `./primitive-funs.Rout.save' ... OK running `mode-methods.R' comparing `mode-methods.Rout' to `./mode-methods.Rout.save' ... OK running `simple-true.R' comparing

Perhaps I missed something obvious, but when I applied patch 2 and then recompiled R-0.49, I found that the objects such as glm.fit that were supposed to be updated still had their original definitions. After some hair-pulling, I remembered that patch saves a backup copy of the original files it changes. Because of the way the makefile for the system database is structured, both the new files and