similar to: reverse dependency checks

Background: I run tools::testInstalledPackage on all packages that dependend on survival (605 as of today) before sending a new release to CRAN. It has a few false positives which I then follow up on.? (Mostly packages with as-yet-incomplete tests in their inst directory). ?Issue: testInstalledPackage("mets")? generates an? "Error in checkVignettes(pkg, lib.loc, latex = FALSE,

Hi, Jim: Could you please look at svd2.Rd and see what it says? It may give an example, where it gave a better answer than svd -- i.e., a marginal case, where svd2 honestly gave a better answer than svd. If we find -- either in svd2.Rd or in one of the revdepchecks -- an example where svd2 gives a demonstrably different answer, we need to consider what to do about that. 1.

Mehmet, That is a loaded topic, not unlikely other topics preoccupying us these days. There is package.skeleton() in base R as you already mentioned. It drove me bonkers that it creates packages which then fail R CMD check, so I wrote a wrapper package (pkgKitten) with another helper function (kitten()) which calls the base R helper and then cleans up it---but otherwise remains faithful to it.

I tried to update my package {pracma} on CRAN from 2.4.2 (2022-09-21) to version 2.4.4 (2023-11-08). This package reverse depends / imports / suggests on 350 packages on CRAN and 25 packages on Bioconductor. The only changes are small corrections on some help files, a new function for stereographic projection, and `gcd` and `Lcm` require integer inputs now (these functions are not used in the

I have a test directory for the survival suite, and dyn.load has ceased to work in it. Below shows the log: tmt1075% R --vanilla R version 2.12.2 (2011-02-25) Copyright (C) 2011 The R Foundation for Statistical Computing ISBN 3-900051-07-0 Platform: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (64-bit) R is free software and comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. You are welcome to redistribute it under certain

Context: R2.15-0 on Ubuntu. 1. I get a WARNING from CMD check for "Package vignette(s) without corresponding PDF: In this case the vignettes directory had both the pdf and Rnw; do I need to move the pdf to inst/doc? I'm reluctant to add the pdf to the svn source on Rforge, per the usual rule that a code management system should not have both a primary source and a object

Almost all of the coxme package and an increasing amount of the survival package are now written in noweb, i.e., .Rnw files. It would be nice to process these using the Sweave function + a special driver, which I can do using a modified version of Sweave. The primary change is to allow the following type of construction <<coxme>> coxme <- function(formula, data, subset, blah blah

I'm currently packaging up some of the kinship matrix routines more formally, these are used in coxme when dealing with family correlation structures. One of my test programs exercises error conditions, i.e., it purposely feeds particular types of invalid pedigree data in to see if the right error message results. So there are comment-action pairs # the next line should generate a

Some questions motivated by this discussion. From the CRAN policy page: "Checking the package should take as little CPU time as possible, as the CRAN check farm is a very limited resource and there are thousands of packages. Long-running tests and vignette code can be made optional for checking, but do ensure that the checks that are left do exercise all the features of the

That is more or less what I had been doing for a long time (having both NEWS.md and NEWS), but decided not to do it any more last year. In fact, you can easily convert NEWS.md to a NEWS file that R's news() can understand, e.g. https://github.com/yihui/knitr/blob/947ad5fc94/Makefile#L8-L10 (if your NEWS.md is like this https://raw.githubusercontent.com/yihui/knitr/947ad5fc94/NEWS.md) I

Peter et al Thanks for the comments on dates. Some of the respondents missed the point, by showing ways that I could work around the problems, when my main argument is that one shouldn't have to work around problems. So I hereto present round 2 of the debate. 1 Postulates a. In my 35 year computing experience, I think that nothing frustrates me more than a computer program that

I am trying to clear up all the "NOTE"s before a CRAN submission, but am a bit confused about this one.?? What is it complaining about -- that it doesn't like my name? ... * checking for file ?deming/DESCRIPTION? ... OK * this is package ?deming? version ?1.4-1? * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... [7s/18s] NOTE Maintainer: ?Terry Therneau <therneau.terry at mayo.edu>?

I'd like to get interaction terms in a model to be in another form. Namely, suppose I had variables age and group, the latter a factor with levels A, B, C, with age * group in the model. What I would like are the variables "age:group=A", "age:group=B" and "age:group=C" (and group itself of course). The coefficients of the model will then be the age effect

When I run R CMD check on the survival package I invariably get a note: ... * checking for file ?survival/DESCRIPTION? ... OK * this is package ?survival? version ?3.2-6? * checking CRAN incoming feasibility ... NOTE Maintainer: ?Terry M Therneau <therneau.terry at mayo.edu>? ... This is sufficient for the auto-check process to return the following failure message: Dear maintainer,

Dear R-user: I am using survreg(Surv()) for fitting a Tobit model of left-censored longitudinal data. For logarithmic transformation of y data, I am trying use survreg.distributions in the following way: tfit=survreg(Surv(y, y>=-5, type="left")~x + cluster(id), dist="gaussian", data=y.data, scale=0, weights=w) my.gaussian<-survreg.distributions$gaussian

I've created some Splus code for a microarray problem that - needed to be in C, to take advantage of some sparse matrix properties - uses a cholesky decompostion as part of the computation For the cholesky, I used the cholesky2 routine, which is a part of the survival library. It does just what I want and I'm familiar with it (after all, I wrote it). In Splus, this all works

Question: I am trying to impliment a function in R that we use quite regularly in Splus, and it fails due to a lack of the "terms.inner" function in R. The substitute is? Part question and part soapbox: Why remove terms.inner from R? It's little used, but rather innocuous. Mostly soapbox: I figured it was no big deal, as I originally discovered the use of terms.inner from

On 30/01/2018 11:29 AM, Brian G. Peterson wrote: > On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 17:00 +0100, Suzen, Mehmet wrote: >> Dear R developers, >> >> I am wondering what are the best practices for developing an R >> package. I am aware of Hadley Wickham's best practice >> documentation/book (http://r-pkgs.had.co.nz/).??I recall a couple of >> years ago there were some

I cloned therneau/survival and the installation failed since there is no definition for exported function survfit(). A file seems to be missing - there is survfit0() and survfit0.R but, compared to CRAN, no survfit.R. Georgi Boshnakov ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 12:53:11 -0500 From: "Therneau, Terry M.,

Hello, I'm trying to use coxph() function to fit a very simple Cox proportional hazards regression model (only one covariate) but the parameter space is restricted to an open set (0, 1). Can I still obtain a valid estimate by using coxph function in this scenario? If yes, how? Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!! [[alternative HTML version deleted]]