similar to: stopifnot() does not stop at first non-TRUE argument

I think Herv?'s idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C. I think it is almost a no-brainer to implement a sequential stopifnot if dropping to C code is allowed. In R it gets trickier, but how about this: Stopifnot <- function(...) { n <- length(match.call()) - 1 for (i in 1:n) { nm

>From an example in http://www.uni-muenster.de/ZIV.BennoSueselbeck/s-html/helpfiles/nargs.html , number of arguments in '...' can be obtained by (function(...)nargs())(...) . I now realize that sys.call() doesn't expand '...' when the function is called with '...'. It just returns the call as is. If 'stopifnot' uses sys.call() instead of match.call() , the

While you are fiddling with stopifnot(), please consider changing the form of the error thrown so that it includes the caller's call. The change would be from something like stop( <<the message>> ) to stop(simpleError( <<the message>>, sys.call(-1))) For the following code f <- function(x, y) { stopifnot(x > y) x - y } g <- function(x,

>>>>> Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fredhutch.org> >>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:54:46 -0700 writes: > Hi, > On 05/15/2017 10:41 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote: >> This is getting pretty convoluted. >> >> The current behavior is consistent with the description at the top of >> the help page -- it does not

I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass. So, here is the code: 8<---- stopifnot_new <- function (...) { mc <- match.call() n <- length(mc)-1 if (n == 0L) return(invisible()) Dparse <- function(call, cutoff = 60L) { ch <- deparse(call, width.cutoff = cutoff) if (length(ch) > 1L) paste(ch[1L],

This is getting pretty convoluted. The current behavior is consistent with the description at the top of the help page -- it does not promise to stop evaluation once the first non-TRUE is found. That seems OK to me -- if you want sequencing you can use stopifnot(A) stopifnot(B) or stopifnot(A && B) I could see an argument for a change that in the multiple argumetn case reports _all_

Le 15/05/2017 ? 15:37, Martin Maechler a ?crit : >>>>>> Serguei Sokol <sokol at insa-toulouse.fr> >>>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 13:14:34 +0200 writes: > > I see in the archives that the attachment cannot pass. > > So, here is the code: > > [....... MM: I needed to reformat etc to match closely to > the current

> On 16 May 2017, at 18:37 , Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> wrote: > > switch(i, ...) > extracts 'i'-th argument in '...'. It is like > eval(as.name(paste0("..", i))) . Hey, that's pretty neat! -pd > > Just mentioning other things: > - For 'n', > n <- nargs() > can be used.

Here is a patch to function 'stopifnot' that adds 'evaluated' argument and makes 'exprs' argument in 'stopifnot' like 'exprs' argument in 'withAutoprint'. --- stop.R 2019-05-30 14:01:15.282197286 +0000 +++ stop_new.R 2019-05-30 14:01:51.372187466 +0000 @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ .Internal(stop(call., .makeMessage(..., domain = domain))) }

Another possible shortcut definition: assert <- function(exprs) do.call("stopifnot", list(exprs = substitute(exprs), local = parent.frame())) After thinking again, I propose to use ??? ? ? stop(simpleError(msg, call = if(p <- sys.parent()) sys.call(p))) - It seems that the call is the call of the frame where stopifnot(...) is evaluated. Because that is the correct context, I

>>>>> Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fredhutch.org> >>>>> on Wed, 3 May 2017 12:08:26 -0700 writes: > On 05/03/2017 12:04 PM, Herv? Pag?s wrote: >> Not sure why the performance penalty of nonstandard evaluation would >> be more of a concern here than for something like switch(). > which is actually a primitive. So it seems that

My points: - The 'withCallingHandlers' construct that is used in current 'stopifnot' code has no effect. Without it, the warning message is the same. The overridden warning is not raised. The original warning stays. - Overriding call in error and warning to 'cl.i' doesn't always give better outcome. The original call may be "narrower" than 'cl.i'. I

Ah, with R 3.5.0 or R 3.4.2, but not with R 3.3.1, 'eval' inside 'for' makes compiled version behave like non-compiled version. options(error = expression(NULL)) library(compiler) enableJIT(0) f <- function(x) for (i in 1) {x; eval(expression(i))} f(is.numeric(y)) # Error: object 'y' not found fc <- cmpfun(f) fc(is.numeric(y)) # Error: object 'y' not found

A private reply by Martin made me realize that I was wrong about stopifnot(exprs=TRUE) . It actually works fine. I apologize. What I tried and was failed was stopifnot(exprs=T) . Error in exprs[[1]] : object of type 'symbol' is not subsettable The shortcut assert <- function(exprs) stopifnot(exprs = exprs) mentioned in "Warning" section of the documentation similarly fails

>From https://github.com/HenrikBengtsson/Wishlist-for-R/issues/70 : ... and follow up note from 2018-03-15: Ouch... in R-devel, stopifnot() has become yet 4-5 times slower; ... which is due to a complete rewrite using tryCatch() and withCallingHandlers(). >From https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2017-May/074256.html , it seems that 'tryCatch' was used to avoid the following

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019, Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel >>>>>> on Sun, 31 Mar 2019 15:26:13 +0000 writes: > > > Ah, with R 3.5.0 or R 3.4.2, but not with R 3.3.1, 'eval' > > inside 'for' makes compiled version behave like > > non-compiled version. > > Ah.. ... thank

>>>>> peter dalgaard <pdalgd at gmail.com> >>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:28:42 +0200 writes: > I think Herv?'s idea was just that if switch can evaluate arguments selectively, so can stopifnot(). But switch() is .Primitive, so does it from C. if he just meant that, then "yes, of course" (but not so interesting). > I think it is

>>>>> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> >>>>> on Thu, 18 May 2017 16:27:09 +0000 writes: >> From an example in >> http://www.uni-muenster.de/ZIV.BennoSueselbeck/s-html/helpfiles/nargs.html >> , number of arguments in '...' can be obtained by > (function(...)nargs())(...) .

On Tue, 16 May 2017, Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>> Herv? Pag?s <hpages at fredhutch.org> >>>>>> on Mon, 15 May 2017 16:54:46 -0700 writes: > > > Hi, > > On 05/15/2017 10:41 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote: > >> This is getting pretty convoluted. > >> > >> The current behavior is consistent

Hi, On 05/15/2017 10:41 AM, luke-tierney at uiowa.edu wrote: > This is getting pretty convoluted. > > The current behavior is consistent with the description at the top of > the help page -- it does not promise to stop evaluation once the first > non-TRUE is found. That seems OK to me -- if you want sequencing you > can use > > stopifnot(A) > stopifnot(B) > > or