Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package"
2019 Mar 29
2
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
Well, first I can't sign in bugzilla myself, that is why I wrote here
first. Also, I don't know if I have the time at the moment to provide
tests, multiple examples or more. If that is not ok or welcomed, that is
fine, I can come back, whenever I have more time to properly report the bug.
I didn't find the existing bug report, sorry for that.
Yes, it is related. My problem was
2019 Mar 29
2
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
I suspect that the issue is addressed (obliquely) in the examples,
which shows that variables with spaces in them (or otherwise
'non-syntactic', i.e. not satisfying the constraints of legal R symbols)
can be handled by protecting them with backticks (``)
## using non-syntactic names:
reformulate(c("`P/E`", "`% Growth`"), response = as.name("+-"))
It
2019 Apr 04
2
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
Proposed patch (I think .txt files work OK as attachments to the list?)
On 2019-04-04 2:21 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote:
>>>>>> Ben Bolker
>>>>>> on Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:34:50 -0400 writes:
>
> > I suspect that the issue is addressed (obliquely) in the examples,
> > which shows that variables with spaces in them (or otherwise
>
2019 Apr 18
3
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
Hi,
Sorry for writing this late, I was very busy. I started this discussion
here. I wish I could write to bugs.r-project.org, but I don't have an
account and I will write here instead.
Meanwhile, I solved my problem with a simpler fix (please see attached
file)/.
/
This requires that term labels are not "ticked". I think this is better,
since it is easier to have column names
2019 Apr 18
1
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
So here is it as txt file. It is funny that a R file is restricted in
R-devel mailing list.
Anyhow, in this case R-core have a few choices here:
* ignore my solution
* show that it is actually bad or worse
* consider adding it
Considering, that it is a minor change from previous version and doesn't
bother the existing usage, I saw the necessity to submit it here. But
newer solution
2019 Mar 29
0
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
The main thing is to post the "small reproducible example".
My (rather long term experience) can be written
if (exists("reproducible example") ) {
DeveloperFixHappens()
} else {
NULL
}
JN
On 2019-03-29 11:38 a.m., Saren Tasciyan wrote:
> Well, first I can't sign in bugzilla myself, that is why I wrote here first. Also, I don't know if I have the
2019 Mar 29
0
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
>>>>> Saren Tasciyan
>>>>> on Thu, 28 Mar 2019 17:02:10 +0100 writes:
> Hi,
> I have found a bug in reformulate function and have a solution for it. I
> was wondering, where I can submit it?
> Best,
> Saren
Well, you could have given a small reproducible example
depicting the bug, notably when posting here:
Just a prose
2019 Apr 04
0
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
>>>>> Ben Bolker
>>>>> on Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:34:50 -0400 writes:
> I suspect that the issue is addressed (obliquely) in the examples,
> which shows that variables with spaces in them (or otherwise
> 'non-syntactic', i.e. not satisfying the constraints of legal R symbols)
> can be handled by protecting them with backticks
2019 Apr 05
0
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
>>>>> Ben Bolker
>>>>> on Thu, 4 Apr 2019 12:46:37 -0400 writes:
> Proposed patch
Thank you Ben!
[the rest is technical nit-picking .. but hopefully interesting
to the smart R-devel reader base:]
There was a very subtle thinko in your patch which is not easily
diagnosed from R's parse_Rd():
Error in
2019 Apr 18
0
Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
Your file didn't make it through the mailing list (which is quite
restrictive about which types/extensions it will take).
I appreciate your enthusiasm and persistence for this issue, but I
suspect you may have trouble convincing R-core to adopt your changes --
they are "better", "easier", "more intuitive" for you ... but how sure
are you they are completely
2019 Nov 24
2
Can't build R 3.6.1 or 3.5.3 on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS
Hi,
Yes I am aware of it.
And yes, I have libicu60 installed. Is it the configure script making a
mistake?
Best,
Saren
On 11/22/19 4:12 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 2:58 PM Saren Tasciyan <saren.tasciyan at ist.ac.at> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to build a more recent version (3.6.1 or 3.5.3) of R on
>> Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
> Are you
2019 Nov 21
3
Can't build R 3.6.1 or 3.5.3 on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS
Hi,
I am trying to build a more recent version (3.6.1 or 3.5.3) of R on
Ubuntu 18.04 LTS. I have installed build-deps with:
sudo apt-get build-dep r-base
and I ran ./configure
During "make", I get the following error:
platform.o: In function `do_eSoftVersion':
/home/user/Desktop/R-3.6.1/src/main/platform.c:3129: undefined reference
to `u_getVersion_58'
2019 Nov 22
0
Can't build R 3.6.1 or 3.5.3 on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 2:58 PM Saren Tasciyan <saren.tasciyan at ist.ac.at> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build a more recent version (3.6.1 or 3.5.3) of R on
> Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
Are you aware you can get up-to-date binaries either from PPA or CRAN:
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:marutter/rrutter
sudo apt-get install r-base-dev
> and I ran ./configure
> During
2009 May 31
9
No more than one "instances" of a type in define()?
Hi folks,
when I try to do something like:
define railsproject($name, $uid, $gid, $userpass, $sqlpass) {
mysql_database { "$name_staging": ensure => present }
mysql_database { "$name_production": ensure => present}
....more stuff...
}
I get:
Puppet::Parser::AST::Resource failed with error ArgumentError:
Duplicate definition: Mysql_database[] is already
2025 Mar 30
1
[External] Creating model formulas programmatically
Hello,
I thought of answering "reformulate can solve the problem" but how do
you create quadratic terms with reformulate?
~(Heigh + Ho + Silver + Away)^2
is still a problem with no solution that I know of but paste/as.formula.
Or Bert's bquote or substitute.
Rui Barradas
?s 23:18 de 29/03/2025, Ebert,Timothy Aaron escreveu:
> The general formula is y ~ a + b + c + ...
>
2010 Jul 07
7
inventory of managed resources
Hi,
are there any good ways of scripting an inventory of managed resources on
all nodes? I''ve found the inventory script by R.I.Pienaar (
http://www.devco.net/archives/2010/02/26/what_does_puppet_manage_on_a_node-2.php)
which does what I want but only locally on each client. Is there any native
way of syncing the client_yaml data centrally or any other way of doing
this?
I need a
2009 Nov 18
2
Website
Hey!
Our flac's official website is looking so old, isn't it?
Let's reformulate it. I wanna do this, anyone else?
Regards,
Lucas Correia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/attachments/20091118/cabc7c52/attachment.htm
2025 Mar 29
1
[External] Creating model formulas programmatically
The general formula is y ~ a + b + c + ...
There is this approach:
formula <- reformulate(independent_vars, response = "y")
model <- lm(formula, data = mydata)
summary(model)
It does not generate a string object, but the formula is still a string even if it is of class formula. Also, in this approach you only get + and if you want interactions or such you will need to code them
2025 Mar 29
4
Creating model formulas programmatically
Note: I am almost certain that this has been asked and answered here
before, so my apologies for the redundant query.
I also know that there are several packages that will do this, but I wish
to do it using base R functions only (see below).
The query: Suppose I have a character vector of names like this:
somenames <- c("Heigh", "Ho", "Silver", "Away")
2025 Mar 30
1
Creating model formulas programmatically
Another solution. reformulate + substitute + as.formula:
substitute(~ (.)^2, list(. = reformulate(somenames)[[2]])) |> as.formula()
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 5:31?PM Bert Gunter <bgunter.4567 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Note: I am almost certain that this has been asked and answered here
> before, so my apologies for the redundant query.
>
> I also know that there are several