Displaying 20 results from an estimated 300 matches similar to: "numeric_version doesn't like numeric versions anymore?"
2024 Apr 25
2
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
>>>>> Herv? Pag?s writes:
> Hi Kurt,
> Is it intended that numeric_version() returns an error by default on
> non-character input in R 4.4.0?
Dear Herve, yes, that's the intention.
> It seems that I can turn this into a warning by setting
> _R_CHECK_STOP_ON_INVALID_NUMERIC_VERSION_INPUTS_=false but I don't
> seem to be able to find any of this mentioned
2024 Apr 24
1
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
Hi Kurt,
Is it intended that numeric_version() returns an error by default on
non-character input in R 4.4.0? It seems that I can turn this into a
warning by setting
_R_CHECK_STOP_ON_INVALID_NUMERIC_VERSION_INPUTS_=false but I don't seem
to be able to find any of this mentioned in the NEWS file.
Thanks,
H.
On 4/1/24 05:28, Kurt Hornik wrote:
>>>>>> Andrea Gilardi via
2024 Apr 27
1
max on numeric_version with long components
I've noticed something in R devel which seems a little off and not the
behavior I see in 4.4.0 or earlier versions. With numeric_versions that
have long (>8 digit) final components max and min return the first element
and not the max or min:
In devel:
> max(numeric_version(c("1.0.1.100000000", "1.0.3.100000000",
"1.0.2.100000000")))
[1] ?1.0.1.100000000?
2024 Apr 25
1
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
On 4/24/24 23:07, Kurt Hornik wrote:
>>>>>> Herv? Pag?s writes:
>> Hi Kurt,
>> Is it intended that numeric_version() returns an error by default on
>> non-character input in R 4.4.0?
> Dear Herve, yes, that's the intention.
>
>> It seems that I can turn this into a warning by setting
>>
2024 Apr 27
1
max on numeric_version with long components
? Sat, 27 Apr 2024 13:56:58 -0500
Jonathan Keane <jkeane at gmail.com> ?????:
> In devel:
> > max(numeric_version(c("1.0.1.100000000", "1.0.3.100000000",
> "1.0.2.100000000")))
> [1] ?1.0.1.100000000?
> > max(numeric_version(c("1.0.1.10000000", "1.0.3.10000000",
> "1.0.2.10000000")))
> [1]
2024 Oct 17
2
Consider getNamespaceVersion() returning a numeric_version
I mean the `numeric_version` object not a numeric (double/int).
Basically to protect me from myself I'd prefer not to have to remember
to wrap `getNamespaceVersion()` with `as.package_version()`.
I suspect a grep of CRAN may highlight others who are erroneously
comparing character objects rather than a comparison between a
`numeric_version` object and a character.
Tim
On 17/10/2024
2024 Oct 17
1
Consider getNamespaceVersion() returning a numeric_version
On 17/10/2024 13:42, Tim Taylor wrote:
> I mean the `numeric_version` object not a numeric (double/int).
> Basically to protect me from myself I'd prefer not to have to remember
> to wrap `getNamespaceVersion()` with `as.package_version()`.
>
> I suspect a grep of CRAN may highlight others who are erroneously
> comparing character objects rather than a comparison between
2024 Oct 17
1
Consider getNamespaceVersion() returning a numeric_version
On 17 October 2024 at 12:38, Tim Taylor wrote:
| Would R-Core be receptive to having getNamespaceVersion() return a
| numeric_version object instead of a named character?
Is this good enough? What's your actual issue a 'numeric' would address?
> as.package_version(getNamespaceVersion("base")) < "4.5.0"
[1] TRUE
>
>
2024 Apr 25
1
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
Hi Kurt,
On 25 April 2024 at 08:07, Kurt Hornik wrote:
| >>>>> Herv? Pag?s writes:
|
| > Hi Kurt,
| > Is it intended that numeric_version() returns an error by default on
| > non-character input in R 4.4.0?
|
| Dear Herve, yes, that's the intention.
|
| > It seems that I can turn this into a warning by setting
| >
2024 Oct 17
1
Consider getNamespaceVersion() returning a numeric_version
Would R-Core be receptive to having getNamespaceVersion() return a
numeric_version object instead of a named character?
Tim
2024 Apr 25
1
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
>>>>> Herv? Pag?s writes:
> On 4/24/24 23:07, Kurt Hornik wrote:
>>>>>>> Herv? Pag?s writes:
>>> Hi Kurt,
>>> Is it intended that numeric_version() returns an error by default on
>>> non-character input in R 4.4.0?
>> Dear Herve, yes, that's the intention.
>>
>>> It seems that I can turn this into a
2024 Mar 29
1
Question regarding .make_numeric_version with non-character input
Dear all,
I have a question regarding the R-devel version of .make_numeric_version() function. As far as I can understand, the current code (https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/66b91578dfc85140968f07dd4e72d8cb8a54f4c6/src/library/base/R/version.R#L50-L56) runs the following steps in case of non-character input:
1. It creates a message named msg using gettextf.
2. Such object is then passed to
2019 Aug 08
5
Underscores in package names
Are there technical reasons that package names cannot be snake case?
This seems to be enforced by `.standard_regexps()$valid_package_name`
which currently returns
"[[:alpha:]][[:alnum:].]*[[:alnum:]]"
Is there any technical reason this couldn't be altered to accept `_`
as well, e.g.
"[[:alpha:]][[:alnum:]._]*[[:alnum:]]"
I realize that historically `_` has not
2013 Oct 03
1
version comparison puzzle
Can anyone explain what I'm missing here?
max(pp1 <- package_version(c("0.99999911.3","1.0.4","1.0.5")))
## [1] ?1.0.4?
max(pp2 <- package_version(c("1.0.3","1.0.4","1.0.5")))
## [1] ?1.0.5?
I've looked at ?package_version , to no avail.
Since max() goes to .Primitive("max")
I'm having trouble figuring out
2007 Sep 13
1
trouble with installing Biobase package
Hi Everybody,
I am having a problem with loading Biobase package. I typed
2 lines below at R prompt
> source ("http://boconductor.org/biocLite.R")
> biocLite (lib="/usr/local/lib/R/library")
which attempted to install a bunch of packages with varying
degree of success. Out of 29, 13 failed. Biobase is one of
them. As a matter of fact, when I looked at logs, most
2018 Oct 10
1
unlockEnvironment()?
R lets one lock an environment with both an R function,
base::lockEnvironment, and a C function, R_LockEnvironment, but, as far as
I can tell, no corresponding function to unlock an environment. Is this
omission on principle or just something that has not been done yet?
I ask because several packages, including the well-used R6 and rlang
packages, fiddle with some bits in with SET_ENVFLAGS and
2019 Aug 09
7
Underscores in package names
Won't it be better to have a convention that allows lowercase, dash,
underscore and dot as only valid characters for new package names and keep
the ancient format validation scheme for older package names?
This could be implemented by a single function, taking a strictNaming_b_1
parameter which defaults to true. Easy to use, and compliance results will
vary according to the parameter value,
2009 Mar 03
1
execution time of .packages
Hello,
The first time in a session I call .packages( all.available = T ), it
takes a long time (I have many packages installed from CRAN):
> system.time( packs <- .packages( all = T ) )
user system elapsed
0.738 0.276 43.787
When I call it again, the time is now much reduced, so there must be
some caching somewhere. I would like to try to reduce the time it takes
the first
2015 Jun 08
2
Bug in loadNamespace?
I am seeing very strange behaviour in R 3.2.0 patched (r68272) and a new
build of R-devel. The sessioninfo() from the former is below.
Here's what I see: If I set the locale, and trigger a namespace load, a
version comparison gives NA, and I get an error. For example, in a new
session started with R --vanilla from the terminal:
> Sys.setlocale(locale='en_US.UTF-8');grid::gpar()
2009 Jan 29
1
Segfault when mistakenly calling [.data.frame (PR#13487)
Full_Name: Christian Brechbuehler
Version: 2.7.2, 2.8.1
OS: linux-gnu
Submission from: (NULL) (24.128.51.18)
Calling [.data.frame on an object that's not a data frame, specifically 1:10,
causes segmentation fault.
Context
=======
We can subscript with a number of different notations:
> (1:10)[3]
[1] 3
> do.call(get("[",pos="package:base"),list(1:10,3))