I still observe this error and just want to ping this thread so we
don't forget it. Should I add this to
https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/ so it's tracked there?
This thread in the archives:
* https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2019-June/078049.html
* https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel
> Suharto Anggono Suharto Anggono via R-devel
> on Thu, 4 Jul 2019 15:13:55 + writes:
> In 'conformMethod', there is another instance of
> omittedSig & .
> It just affects error message.
> Original:
> if(any(is.na(match(signature[omittedSig], c("ANY", "mi
In 'conformMethod', there is another instance of
omittedSig & .
It just affects error message.
Original:
if(any(is.na(match(signature[omittedSig], c("ANY", "missing") {
bad <- omittedSig & is.na(match(signature[omittedSig], c("ANY",
"missing")))
After r76756:
if(any(iiN <- i
.
> --
> Georgi Boshnakov
The 2nd patch I committed -- the one mostly to
rematchDefiniton() -- does exactly that: It uses .local()
calls where those argument *are* named which should be named.
==> hence the above example works fine there.
Martin
> -
) or maybe even
.local(object, , target).
--
Georgi Boshnakov
------
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 22:44:49 +0200
From: Martin Maechler
To: R-devel , Henrik Bengtsson
Cc: Martin Maechler
Subject: Re: [Rd] methods package: A _R_CHECK_LENGTH_1_LOGIC2_=true
error
Mes
> Martin Maechler
> on Sat, 29 Jun 2019 12:05:49 +0200 writes:
> Martin Maechler
> on Sat, 29 Jun 2019 10:33:10 +0200 writes:
> peter dalgaard
> on Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:20:03 +0200 writes:
>>> > On 28 Jun 2019, at 16:03 , Martin Maechler
wrote:
>>>
> Martin Maechler
> on Sat, 29 Jun 2019 10:33:10 +0200 writes:
> peter dalgaard
> on Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:20:03 +0200 writes:
>> > On 28 Jun 2019, at 16:03 , Martin Maechler
wrote:
>> >
>> >> Henrik Bengtsson
>> >>on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:
> peter dalgaard
> on Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:20:03 +0200 writes:
> > On 28 Jun 2019, at 16:03 , Martin Maechler
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Henrik Bengtsson
> >>on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:39 -0700 writes:
> >
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> untrace(methods::conformMethod)
> >> at <- c(12,
> On 28 Jun 2019, at 16:03 , Martin Maechler wrote:
>
>> Henrik Bengtsson
>>on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:39 -0700 writes:
>
>> Using:
>>
>> untrace(methods::conformMethod)
>> at <- c(12,4,3,2)
>> str(body(methods::conformMethod)[[at]])
>> ## language omittedSig <- omittedSig && (si
> Henrik Bengtsson
> on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:39 -0700 writes:
> Using:
>
> untrace(methods::conformMethod)
> at <- c(12,4,3,2)
> str(body(methods::conformMethod)[[at]])
> ## language omittedSig <- omittedSig && (signature[omittedSig] != "missing")
> cc <- 0L
> trace(methods::confor
Using:
untrace(methods::conformMethod)
at <- c(12,4,3,2)
str(body(methods::conformMethod)[[at]])
## language omittedSig <- omittedSig && (signature[omittedSig] != "missing")
cc <- 0L
trace(methods::conformMethod, tracer = quote({
cc <<- cc + 1L
print(cc)
if (cc == 31) { ## manually identifi
> peter dalgaard
> on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:23:14 +0200 writes:
> Henrik,
> If a minimal reprex is hard to construct, could you perhaps instrument
your version of R to include a browser() call at the start of the
> else if(!all(signature[omittedSig] == "missing")) {
Henrik,
If a minimal reprex is hard to construct, could you perhaps instrument your
version of R to include a browser() call at the start of the
else if(!all(signature[omittedSig] == "missing")) {
branch, run the code that triggers the issue for you (and must hit that branch)
and tell us
Ah, not quite: The logic is that if something has omittedSig and "missing" is
not the signature, those signatures get _set_ to missing. There's just a bit of
tap-dancing around to find exactly which they are so that there can be a
message about changing them.
-pd
> On 25 Jun 2019, at 09:44 , p
Argh! Yes you are right, the "fix" doesn't. And I fell into the same "hey it's
a vector so && has to be wrong"-trap. So this has to be reverted to something
that has at least failed unconspicuously for a decade Will do. Thanks to
Martin for remaining suspicious!
[This code was originally fr
**Maybe this bug needs to be understood further before applying the
patch because patch is most likely also wrong**
Because, from just looking at the expressions, I think neither the R
3.6.0 version:
omittedSig <- omittedSig && (signature[omittedSig] != "missing")
nor the patched version (I prop
> Henrik Bengtsson via R-core
> on Sun, 23 Jun 2019 11:29:58 -0700 writes:
> Thank you.
> To correct myself, I can indeed reproduce this with R --vanilla too.
> A reproducible example is:
> $ R --vanilla
> R version 3.6.0 Patched (2019-05-31 r76629) -- "Planting o
Thank you.
To correct myself, I can indeed reproduce this with R --vanilla too.
A reproducible example is:
$ R --vanilla
R version 3.6.0 Patched (2019-05-31 r76629) -- "Planting of a Tree"
...
> Sys.setenv("_R_CHECK_LENGTH_1_LOGIC2_" = "true")
> loadNamespace("oligo")
Error in omittedSig && (sign
This looks obvious enough, so I just committed your fix to R-devel and
R-patched.
I'm at the wrong machine for thorough testing, but at least it seems to build
OK. However, I sense some risk that this could uncover sleeping bugs elsewhere,
so watch out.
-pd
> On 22 Jun 2019, at 18:49 , Henrik
DISCLAIMER: I can not get this error with R --vanilla, so it only
occurs when some other package is also loaded. I don't have time to
find to narrow that down for a reproducible example, but I believe the
following error in R 3.6.0:
> Sys.setenv("_R_CHECK_LENGTH_1_LOGIC2_" = "true")
> library(oli
John,
> the 2008 book ...
I suspected that I had overlooked something simple. This fits the
bill.
> R 2.8.1
I have been using 2.7. I will update.
Thanks for the help.
Terry
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mai
Hi Terry,
Terry Therneau wrote:
I'm working on the next version of coxme, one step of which is converting
the bdsmatrix library from Splus to R. Actually, it is a conversion from
S4 methods as first described in the Green book to S4 methods as they
currently exist. Mostly it's going ok, but
Terry Therneau wrote:
> I'm working on the next version of coxme, one step of which is converting
> the bdsmatrix library from Splus to R. Actually, it is a conversion from
> S4 methods as first described in the Green book to S4 methods as they
> currently exist. Mostly it's going ok, but not
I'm working on the next version of coxme, one step of which is converting
the bdsmatrix library from Splus to R. Actually, it is a conversion from
S4 methods as first described in the Green book to S4 methods as they
currently exist. Mostly it's going ok, but not entirely.
1. The biggest is
Hi,
src/library/methods/src/methods_list_dispatch.c has the following code
which is part of the definition of R_dispatchGeneric:
/* get its class */
SEXP arg; int check_err;
PROTECT(arg = R_tryEval(arg_sym, ev, &check_err));
if(check_err)
25 matches
Mail list logo
