similar to: How to debug "Repeated formal argument" error

I want to add an argument if it is not present. Following the Green Book, p. 337: test <- function(x, ...){ dots <- list(...) if (!hasArg(from)) from <- 0 else from <- dots$from curve(x, from=from, ...) } > test(sin) > test(sin, from=4) Error in curve(x, from = from, ...) : formal argument "from" matched by multiple actual arguments The FAQ says, in

I am running the nnet package as > neural.soft<-nnet(custcat~region+ed+marital+tenure+age+address+income,size=3,softmax=TRUE) This returns the error message : formal argument "softmax" matched by multiple actual arguments Here the dependent variable "custcat" is a factor with 4-levels. This error does not crop up for any other arguments of nnet(), including

Hi, very sporadic and non-reproducible, I get the following type of errors: Error in get(name, envir = envir) : formal argument "envir" matched by multiple actual arguments Error in exists(cacheName, envir = envir, inherit = FALSE) : formal argument "envir" matched by multiple actual arguments Error in paste(..., sep = sep) : formal argument "sep" matched by

Hi, I'm using the add-on package "sound".I have the following > q<-loadSample("a.wav") > plot.Sample(q,axes=FALSE) this gives me the error. Error in plot.default(sound(s)[1, ], type = "l", col = "red", ylim = c(-1, : formal argument "axes" matched by multiple actual arguments I'm guessing the package has some predefined

?unique as an example > mat<-matrix(c(1,2,3,1,1,2,1,2,3,4,7,5), ncol=3, byrow=T) > mat #rows 1 and 3 are identical [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 1 2 3 [2,] 1 1 2 [3,] 1 2 3 [4,] 4 7 5 > unique(mat) [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 1 2 3 [2,] 1 1 2 [3,] 4 7 5 Stefano -----Messaggio originale----- Da: r-help-bounces at r-project.org

Hi list, This looks similar to the problem reported here https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2006-April/037199.html by Henrik Bengtsson a long time ago. It is very sporadic and non-reproducible. Henrik, do you remember if your code was using reg.finalizer()? I tend to suspect it but I'm not sure. I've been hunting this bug for months but today, and we the help of other Bioconductor

At this point I would just due: formals(body(method)[[2L]]) At some point we need to figure out what to do with this .local() confusion. On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Roebuck,Paul L <PLRoebuck at mdanderson.org> wrote: > I'm attempting to reflect the information for use with corresponding > fields in GUI (in a different package), to provide default values, > argname

I think I understand what you're saying now, but I'm still kind of missing the benefit from the approach. As far as I can tell just giving foo formals for the arguments you want it to catch gives you the end result you want, doesn't it? And if the generic has ... in it, you can (if you're very careful) add formals to specific methods that would capture arguments not meant for

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: jim holtman <jholtman at gmail.com> Date: Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 11:42 AM Subject: Re: [R] request: most repeated sequnce To: Muhammad Azam <mazam72 at yahoo.com> This should do it for you: > x=c(1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4, +

Janko, I'm not entirely sure I understand your proposal. Are you suggesting methods be dispatched based on the *contents* of ... (ie which arguments are in there)? This seems like it would be pretty different from how dispatch behaves now, which is entirely class based. Even the dispatching based on ... via dots methods is class based, having nothing to do AFAIK with the argument names. From

Dear Petr Thanks for the response. Hope it will now help me to proceed. best regards M.Azam ________________________________ From: Petr PIKAL <petr.pikal@precheza.cz> Cc: R Help <r-help@r-project.org>; r-help-bounces@r-project.org Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 8:43:27 AM Subject: Odp: [R] Request: Most repeated sequence considering combinations at each row Hi not sure if this is

Our target also use different registers for pointer and non-pointer parameters. > If you need llvm::Argument, this returns the iterator pointing to the > first argument: DAG.getMachineFunction().getFunction() only works in LowerFormalArguments (there it returns the callee), not in LowerCall (where it returns the caller, rather than the callee). You need to pass more information about the

Well, the benefit lies in the ability to pass along arguments via `...` to more than one recipient that use *identical argument names* and/or when these recipients are not necessarily located on the same calling stack layer. I'm *not* after a *general* change in the way arguments are dispatched/functions are called as I'm actually a big friend of keepings things quite explicit (thus

Hi there, I have a question regarding a data set that looks like the following: 8 repeated measurements for 3 dosage levels. However, the measurements for each dosage levels are taken on a different group of subjects. example: subject time dosage measure 11         1          1          154 11         2          1          150 :          :           :             : 11        

I just discovered what seems to me to be a slight funny in respect of formal argument names. If I define a function foo <- function(a,b){ ... whatever ...} then ``inside'' foo() the exists() function will return TRUE from ``exists("a") whether an object named ``a'' exists or not. But get("a") will yield an error ``object "a" not found''

Because functions get called and therefore, the calling sequence matters. It?s just protecting you from yourself, but as someone pointed out, there?s a way to silence such notes. G From: Herv? Pag?s <hpages.on.github at gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 2:40 PM To: Izmirlian, Grant (NIH/NCI) [E] <izmirlig at mail.nih.gov>; Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com>;

Hi, How can I get the llvm-type of the formal argument while lowering it ? My target needs to map pointer and non-pointer parameters to different registers. In addition, parameter lowering is address space dependent (another reason why I need such information). Looking at the DAGBuilder, I found that it is dropping it when translating llvm-types to BE types. Even if the base type is saved

If you need llvm::Argument, this returns the iterator pointing to the first argument: Function::const_arg_iterator Arg = DAG.getMachineFunction().getFunction()->arg_begin(); On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Ivan Llopard <ivanllopard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > How can I get the llvm-type of the formal argument while lowering it ? > > My target needs to map pointer and

Hello, Can anyone give me a pointer where to find the implementation code for binding values to formal arguments in functions? For example, if we have a function f <- function(x,y)... and f(1,2) is called, I want to find the code that binds 1 to x when evaluating f(1,2). I tried eval.c but it's too long and I was lost... Thanks! -- Yi

I'm attempting to reflect the information for use with corresponding fields in GUI (in a different package), to provide default values, argname as key for UI label lookups, etc. So I want something much more like the formals of the implementation: { "object", "method": c("median", "vs", "tukey"),