similar to: Add-on argument in sample()

Regarding Tengfei Yin's post about an error trying to install "cluster" in 2.13.0, I have gotten an error with this package when trying to install the released version of 2.12.0. Here is the output on an Ubuntu Linux system: begin installing recommended package cluster * installing *source* package 'cluster' ... ** libs make[3]: Entering directory

The current R release candidate has a lack of protect bug (of very long standing) with respect to the R_print.na_string and R_print.na_string_noquote fields of the static R_print structure declared in Print.h. This shows up very occassionally as incorrect output from the following lines in reg-tests-2.R: x <- c("a", NA, "b") factor(x) factor(x, exclude="")

There is a weakness in the 'sample' function that is highlighted in the help file. The 'x' argument can be either the vector from which to sample, or the maximum value of the sequence from which to sample. This can be ambiguous if the length of 'x' is one. I propose adding an argument that allows the user (programmer) to avoid that ambiguity: function (x, size, replace

In testing pqR on Solaris SPARC systems, I have found two bugs that are also present in recent R Core versions. You can see the bugs and fixes at the following URLs: https://github.com/radfordneal/pqR/commit/739a4960a4d8f3a3b20cfc311518369576689f37 https://github.com/radfordneal/pqR/commit/339b7286c7b43dcc6b00e51515772f1d7dce7858 The first bug, in nls, is most likely to occur on a 64-bit

> > The current R release candidate has a lack of protect bug > > (of very long standing) > > [ but not really reported, right ? ] It's "long standing" because it exists in versions of R going back many years. > but the R 3.2.1 release candidate probably really cannot be > touched now, with something non-trivial like this. > > We'd be

I've been getting pqR to work on windows systems, and in the process have discovered various problems with R core versions of R and with Rtools. One is with the implementation of OpenMP in 64-bit Rtools. This problem is in Rtools215 and Rtools33, and presumably all the ones in between. You can see the problem with the following test program: #include <stdio.h> #include <omp.h>

On 6/16/2015 1:32 PM, Peter Meissner wrote: > Am .06.2015, 14:55 Uhr, schrieb Millot Gael <Gael.Millot at curie.fr>: > >> Hi. >> >> I have a problem with the default behavior of sample(), which performs >> sample(1:x) when x is a single value. >> This behavior is well explained in ?sample. >> However, this behavior is annoying when the number of

> I propose a patch to ifelse that leverages anyNA(test) to achieve an > improvement in performance. For a test vector of length 10, the change > nearly halves the time taken and for a test of length 1 million, there > is a tenfold increase in speed. Even for small vectors, the > distributions of timings between the old and the proposed ifelse do > not intersect. For smaller

> Radford Nea: > > So it may make more sense to move towards consistency in the > > permissive direction, rather than the restrictive direction. > > > That would mean allowing matrix(1,1,1) < (1:2), and maybe also things > > like matrix(1,2,2)+(1:8). > > Martin Maechler: > That is an interesting idea. Yes, in my view that would >

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:52:56PM -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 14/07/2015 6:08 PM, Radford Neal wrote: > > In testing pqR on Solaris SPARC systems, I have found two bugs that > > are also present in recent R Core versions. You can see the bugs and > > fixes at the following URLs: > > > >

Gabriel Becker writes: AFAIK R does not automatically copy function arguments. R actually tries very hard to avoid copying while maintaining "pass by value" functionality. ... R only copies data when you modify an object, not when you simply pass it to a function. This is a bit misleading. R tries to avoid copying by maintaining a count of how many references there are to an

> > But isn't the intent to make it an error later? So I assume we're > > debating making it an error, not just a warning. > > Yes, that's correct. > But if we have a longish deprecation period (i.e. where there's > only a warning) all important code should have been adapted > before it turns to an error That might be true for

Hugh, (Note I speak for myself only and not for R-core) Thanks for looking into this. I think it's great to have community members that are interested in contributing to R and helping it continue to get better. And I think, and my local experiments bear out, that using anyNA as a fastpass condition does allow us to get a significant speedup over what's in there now. To do so, though, I

> To allow for future changes in the way the need for duplication is > detected in R internal C code, package C code should avoid direct > use of NAMED,and SET_NAMED, or assumptions on the maximal value > of NAMED. Use the macros MAYBE_REFERENCED, MAYBE_SHARED, and > MARK_NOT_MUTABLE instead. These currently correspond to > > MAYBE_REFERENCED(x): NAMED(x) > 0 >

> On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 14:01 +0000, brodie gaslam via R-devel wrote: > > I'm thinking of this passage: > > > > > Logical values are sent as 0 (FALSE), 1 (TRUE) or INT_MIN = > > > -2147483648 (NA, but only if NAOK is true), and the compiled code > > > should return one of these three values. (Non-zero values other > > > than INT_MIN are

> On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, G?bor Cs?rdi wrote: > > > I like the idea of string literals, but the C/C++ way clearly does not > > work. The Python/Julia way might, i.e.: > > > > """this is a > > multi-line > > lineral""" > > luke-tierney at uiowa.edu: > This does look like a promising option; some more careful checking

Michael Lawrence (as last in long series of posters)... > Yes, it would bind the language object to the environment, like an > R-level promise (but "promise" of course refers specifically to just > _lazy_ evaluation). > > For the uqs() thing, expanding calls like that is somewhat orthogonal > to NSE. It would be nice in general to be able to write something like >

> From: Richard Cotton <richierocks at gmail.com> > > The rep function is very versatile, but that versatility comes at a > cost: it takes a bit of effort to learn (and remember) its syntax. > This is a problem, since rep is one of the first functions many > beginners will come across. Of the three main uses of rep, two have > simpler alternatives. > > rep(x,

Is this a SPARC system? On at least some SPARC systems, the "long double" type in C is implemented very slowly in software, and it seems that it is used for the sums done when calculating standard deviations with "sd". Radford Neal > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 18:55:37 -0500 > From: "Eberle, Anthony" <aeber at allstate.com> > To: <r-devel at

Gabor Csardi writes: > Btw. for some motivation, here is a (surely incomplete) list of > languages with '+' as the string concatenation operator: > > ALGOL 68, BASIC, C++, C#, Cobra, Pascal, Object Pascal, Eiffel, Go, > JavaScript, Java, Python, Turing, Ruby, Windows Powers hell, > Objective-C, F#, Sc-ala, Ya. The situation for R is rather different from that of a