similar to: Strange lazy evaluation of default arguments

Mathias, If it's any comfort, I appreciated the example; 'expected' behaviour maybe, but a very nice example for staff/student training! S Ellison > -----Original Message----- > From: R-help [mailto:r-help-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Matthias > Gondan > Sent: 02 September 2017 18:22 > To: r-help at r-project.org > Subject: [R] Strange lazy evaluation of

Another way to avoid the problem is to not redefine variables that are arguments. E.g., > Su3 <- function(u=100, l=u, mu=0.53, sigma2=4.3^2, verbose) { if (verbose) { print(c(u, l, mu)) } uNormalized <- u/sqrt(sigma2) lNormalized <- l/sqrt(sigma2) muNormalized <- mu/sqrt(sigma2) c(uNormalized, lNormalized, muNormalized) } > Su3(verbose=TRUE)

Hello, One way of preventing that is to use ?force. Just put force(l) right after the commented out print and before you change 'u'. Hope this helps, Rui Barradas Citando Matthias Gondan <matthias-gondan at gmx.de>: > Dear R developers, > > sessionInfo() below > > Please have a look at the following two versions of the same function: > > 1. Intended

Dear Bill, All makes perfect sense (including the late evaluation). I actually discovered the problem by looking at old code which used your proposed solution. Still I find it strange (and, hnestly, I don?t like R?s behavior in this respect), and I am wondering why u is not being copied to L just before u is assigned a new value. Of course, this would require the R interpreter to track all these

Hi, Can anyone help me to understand the ScheduleDAGInstrs::buildSchedGraph() method? I find the handling of AliasChain is disturbing since: 1. A new alias chain add deps to all possibly aliasing SUs, and then clears those lists. 2. When AliasChain is present, the addChainDependency() method is called, but the target hook areMemAccessesTriviallyDisjoint() called inside

Hello again, Sorry -- I think I found the problem somewhere else. I was a bit confused and missed the fact that adjustChainDeps() is called a few lines down and does just what I wanted :-) I would like to instead ask another question: Why is I->isCtrl() used in code like // Iterate over chain dependencies only. for (SUnit::const_succ_iterator I = SUb->Succs.begin(), E =

On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Nov 9, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote: >>> On Nov 9, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Jim Grosbach wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It's not good, but people do it. Also constructing enums via & and | etc. It'd be nice to be able to get the name of whatever it is that the code generator actually produced :)

Hi, Thank you for the reply. >It looks to me like we can choose any subset of edges here and be correct. We're basically trying to prune/pinch the DAG edges here. They can easily blow up with AA sched. I would guess that isCtrl() edges are good ones to bypass because they could be a low-latecy edges, whereas true data dependencies from a load are expected to be >higher latency, so they

The background: I'm trying to fit a Poisson-lognormal distrbutuion to some data. This is a way of modelling species abundances: N ~ Pois(lam) log(lam) ~ N(mu, sigma2) The number of individuals are Poisson distributed with an abundance drawn from a log-normal distrbution. To fit this to data, I need to integrate out lam. In principle, I can do it this way: PLN1 <- function(lam, Count,

Hi All, This is not really an R question but a statistical one. If someone could either give me the brief explanation or point me to a reference that might help, I'd appreciate it. I want to estimate the mean of a log-normal distribution, given the (log scale normal) parameters mu and sigma squared (sigma2). I understood this should simply be: exp(mu + sigma2) ... but I the following code

Hi everyone, I am looking to do some manual maximum likelihood estimation in R. I have done a lot of work in Stata and so I have been using output comparisons to get a handle on what is happening. I estimated a simple linear model in R with lm() and also my own maximum likelihood program. I then compared the output with Stata. Two things jumped out at me. Firstly, in Stata my coefficient

Dear all, I am stuck on the following problem with integrate(). I have been out of luck using RSiteSearch().. My function is g2<-function(b,theta,xi,yi,sigma2){ xi<-cbind(1,xi) eta<-drop(xi%*%theta) num<-exp((eta + rep(b,length(eta)))*yi) den<- 1 + exp(eta + rep(b,length(eta))) result=(num/den)*exp((-b^2)/sigma2)/sqrt(2*pi*sigma2)

Dear UseRs, I wrote the following function to use MLE. --------------------------------------------- mlog <- function(theta, nx = 1, nz = 1, dt){ beta <- matrix(theta[1:(nx+1)], ncol = 1) delta <- matrix(theta[(nx+2):(nx+nz+1)], ncol = 1) sigma2 <- theta[nx+nz+2] gamma <- theta[nx+nz+3] y <- as.matrix(dt[, 1], ncol = 1) x <- as.matrix(data.frame(1,

Is there an R implementation of a scheme for automatic smoothing parameter selection with loess, e.g., by minimizing one of the AIC/GCV statistics discussed by Hurvich, Simonoff & Tsai (1998)? Below is a function that calculates the relevant values of AICC, AICC1 and GCV--- I think, because I to guess from the names of the components returned in a loess object. I guess I could use

Hi, A question. When I run gelman.diag and gelman.plot with mcmc lists obtained from MCMCregress, the results are following. > post.R <- MCMCregress(Size~Age+Status, data = data, burnin = 5000, mcmc = 100000, + thin = 10, verbose = FALSE, beta.start = NA, sigma2.start = NA, + b0 = 0, B0 = 0, nu = 0.001, delta = 0.001) > post1.R <- MCMCregress(Size~Age+Status, data

Hi, I am trying to parameterize the following mixed model (following Piepho and Ogutu 2002), to test for a trend over time, using multiple sites: y[ij]=mu+b[j]+a[i]+w[j]*(beta +t[i])+c[ij] where: y[ij]= a response variable at site i and year j mu = fixed intercept Beta=fixed slope w[j]=constant representing the jth year (covariate) b[j]=random effect of jth year, iid N(0,sigma2[b]) a[i]=random

Hello, I am struggling for some time now to estimate AR(1) process for commodity price time series. I did it in STATA but cannot get a result in R. The equation I want to estimate is: p(t)=a+b*p(t-1)+error Using STATA I get 0.92 for a, and 0.73 for b. Code that I use in R is: p<-matrix(data$p) # price at time t lp<-cbind(1,data$lp) # price at time t-1

Hi, I am trying to fit a function of the form: y = A0 + A1 * exp( -0.5* ( (X - Mu1) / Sigma1 )^2 ) - A2 * exp ( -0.5* ( (X-Mu2)/Sigma2 )^2 ) i.e. a mean term (A0) + a difference between two gaussians. The constraints are A1,A2 >0, Sigma1,Sigma2>0, and usually Sigma2>Sigma1. The plot looks like a "Mexican Hat". I had trouble (poor fits) fitting this function to toy data

Hello all, I have a large parameter problem with the following very simple likelihood function: fn<-function(param) { x1<-param[1:n] g1<-param[(n+1):(2*n)] beta<-param[(2*n+1):(2*n+k)] sigma2<-param[2*n+k+1]^2 meang1sp<-mean(g1[sp]) mu<-beta%*%matrix(x1,1,n)-(g1[sp]-meang1sp)%*%matrix(g1,1,n) return(sum((ydc-mu)^2)/(2*sigma2) + n*k*log(sqrt(sigma2)) +

i am using sarima() function as below ___________________________________________________________________________________________ sarima=function(data,p,d,q,P=0,D=0,Q=0,S=-1,tol=.001){ n=length(data) constant=1:n xmean=matrix(1,n,1) if (d>0 & D>0) fitit=arima(data, order=c(p,d,q), seasonal=list(order=c(P,D,Q), period=S),