On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Peter wrote:
> Can you do something like check if example_name is a valid argument
> for the function at run time, and if not, check example.name instead?
> Would this impose too high a performance cost?
Unfortunately, there is no reliable way to work out what arg
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
> Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> IMHO, if you're wondering about the case where *both* are valid, then
>> you've already lost. If you're wondering that, then it means you're
>> trying to handle the case where function A takes foo.bar, and function
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
> Peter wrote:
>>
>> Can you do something like check if example_name is a valid argument
>> for the function at run time, and if not, check example.name instead?
>> Would this impose too high a performance cost?
>>
>> I agree this won't cov
Peter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>> For my own use, I looked around, and couldn't find any functions that
>>> had _ arguments, and lots that had . arguments.
>> Older R code did not have _ (because it used to be an invalid character
>> for regular symbol, as
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
>> For my own use, I looked around, and couldn't find any functions that
>> had _ arguments, and lots that had . arguments.
>
> Older R code did not have _ (because it used to be an invalid character
> for regular symbol, as _ was an alias
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>> Rewriting function signatures in order to replace '.' with '_' is something
>> that is ichting me, but which I would like to happen a safe way. For
>> example, what if a function signature has both 'foo.bar' and 'f
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>>
>> Rewriting function signatures in order to replace '.' with '_' is something
>> that is ichting me, but which I would like to happen a safe way. For
>> example, what if a func
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Laurent Gautier wrote:
>
> Rewriting function signatures in order to replace '.' with '_' is something
> that is ichting me, but which I would like to happen a safe way. For
> example, what if a function signature has both 'foo.bar' and 'foo_bar' in
> its list of p
Rewriting function signatures in order to replace '.' with '_' is
something that is ichting me, but which I would like to happen a safe
way. For example, what if a function signature has both 'foo.bar' and
'foo_bar' in its list of parameters ?
I have already started with having semi-static (th
The first call is an issue with you Python code.
'.' is a special character in Python.
http://rpy.sourceforge.net/rpy2/doc/html/robjects.html#functions
(same in 2.10-dev, with extra gizmos
http://rpy.sourceforge.net/rpy2/doc-dev/html/robjects.html#functions
L.
Gary Strangman wrote:
> Hi agai
Gary,
The "wrong" order (transposed) is for the creation of a data.frame,
which is distinct from reading the information needed to create a
data.frame from a file in which each row is a represented by a line.
In R, the functions read.table, read.csv, read.delim, etc... are doing
the transposit
11 matches
Mail list logo
