similar to: Problem with passwords surrounded by curly braces

Hello, I am running a program in r that calls a function, which calls another function, which calls another etc. These functions are of the form: example<- function(x,y,z) {x, y, and z are defined within curly braces like this} Here's my question. To start the main function, I input as an initial parameter a matrix of regressors of the form: MyMatrix<-cbind(this.one,that.one)

When I return an html fragment to Ajax.Updater with evalScripts: true set, and there is a script fragment with curly braces in it (a function declaration or an object literal), the curly braces are getting stripped out somehow, and leaving me with invalid JS. I think this is the case because I put an alert in the evalScripts method right before the "return eval(script)" and it had no

Hello, I am sorry if I am writing to a wrong list because honestly I do not know where to write but I would like to be able to set up sa-learn via cron to learn from spam folder of a particular email account (via IMAP). Can anyone share how to do it? Is dovecot involved in it? I am using: Exim 4.69 Dovecot 1.0.10 p5-Mail-SpamAssassin-3.2.1 Thanks a lot for helping. Zbigniew Szalbot

The original style was correct, the new style is wrong. Multi-line indents get curly braces for readability. regards, dan carpenter

I am more than a little puzzled by your question. In the construct {expr1; expr2; expr3} all of the expressions expr1, expr2, and expr3 are evaluated, in that order. That's what curly braces are FOR. When you want some expressions evaluated in a specific order, that's why and when you use curly braces. If that's not what you want, don't use them. Complaining about it is like

I used the wrong address. This was meant as a reply to another post. On 10/17/07 10:55, thomas.schwander at mvv.de wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > I read your post in the R-Help. Did you get rid off the problem? I'm standing inf > ront of the same problem... If you've got an answer to me to drae a curly bracket, > could you please be so kind to tell me who you did? I missed

Fair enough, Akshay. Wondering why a design was chosen is reasonable. There are languages like python that allow unpacking multiple values and it is not uncommon to return multiple things from some constructs as in this: >>> a,b,c = { 4, 5, 6 } >>> a 4 >>> b 5 >>> c 6 But that is a bit of an illusion as the thing in curly braces is a very

I will be collecting data where one of the fields may be of length zero to some variable number of elements, along with other items of fixed size. As an illustration if mydata.dat is: V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 1, 2.3, "Bob", {1.7,2.3,3.4}, 4.5 2, 3.4, "Carol", {}, 3.4 3, 2.2, "Ted", {1.0,2.5}, 3.5 ... ... I want to be able to do something like mydata

Dear Avi, Thanks for your reply...your exhortations are indeed justified...! But one caveat: I was not complaining about anything...just was curious of the rationale of a particular design....Thanks again... Thanking you, Yours sincerely, AKSHAY M KULKARNI ________________________________ From: R-help <r-help-bounces at r-project.org> on behalf of avi.e.gross at gmail.com

Akshay, Your question seems a tad mysterious to me as you are complaining about NOTHING. R was designed to return single values. The last statement executed in a function body, for example, is the value returned even when not at the end. Scoping is another issue entirely. What is visible is another discussion. So, yes, if you can see ALL the variables, you might see the last one BUT there

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1726 Bug ID: 1726 Summary: invalid json generated by ipset list -output json Product: ipset Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Debian GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: P5 Component: default Assignee:

Re: placement of braces and "else" clauses. At the R prompt, I believe their placement must avoid causing a syntactically complete statement at the wrong place. This can results in what might be considered rather awkward looking code. IF it is known that code will be used via sourcing a script only, is there any potential problem with placing braces as shown below ? xxx <-

Dear developers, while preparing to submit a package to CRAN, I noticed that a check for lost braces in Rd files (which is enabled in the current r-devel when checking with the '--as-cran' option) seems to return false positives. More specifically, a 'Lost braces' NOTE is issued (at least sometimes) when using the \insertRef{...}{...} command from the Rdpack package. Since

Hello again! This is the revised revised revised proposal: http://maruku.rubyforge.org/proposal.md http://maruku.rubyforge.org/proposal.html http://maruku.rubyforge.org/proposal.pdf The main change was to use an opening string of brace+colon "{:" to not lock-up the precious "{" forever, so that in the future one could think of using the braces also for other purposes.

Dear spec''ers, As many of you already know, we''re gearing up for a pretty big 0.8 release of RSpec in the next couple of weeks. I''m writing in advance because I want to give you a heads up about upcoming changes and how they may impact your existing specs. Two important things to note first: 1. We will provide a translator that you''ll be able to use to

This is a known issue already reported to the Rdpack maintainer. In some cases, the Rd code generated by Rdpack's macros contains unnecessary braces that trigger the check note because they match the pattern "text{text}" that detects common mistakes like "code{x}" (missing an escape for the macro name). Rdpack's fork of tools::deparseLatex() is being updated to

Hey all, I get the following error. Now I know it''s related to a curly brace, but it seems that all curly braces are properly in place. So I''m not sure why I get this error: SyntaxError in DashboardController#panels rails/app/controllers/dashboard_controller.rb:170: syntax error, unexpected ''\n'', expecting tASSOC def panels addDetailToContainer =

the version 2 parser thinks I have unnecessary braces, but I can't find any. False positive or am I missing something? If a false positive, is there any way to work around the warning? * checking Rd files against version 2 parser ... WARNING Warning: ./man/dbetabinom.Rd:32-34: Unnecessary braces at ?{p(x) = % (C(N,x)*Beta(N-x+theta*(1-p),x+theta*p))/% Beta(theta*(1-p),theta*p)}?

Hi all, I have a situation where I have 16 bins. I generate a random number and then want to know which bin number the random number falls in. Right now, I am using a serious of 16 if() else {} statements which get very complicated with the embedded curly braces. Is there a more efficient (i.e., easier) way to go about this? boundaries<-(0:16)/16 rand<-runif(1) Which bin number (1:16)

I ran into this and found the result very surprising: identical( quote({ a }), quote({ a }) ) # FALSE It seems related to curly braces. For example, parens work fine: identical( quote(( a )), quote(( a )) ) # TRUE Is this expected behavior? I can't seem to find anything in the help for identical that relates to this. -Winston