Once all the other issues are resolved, I'd suggest e-mailing
r-cran-submissions with this explanation and asking for clarification.
My interpretation would have been the same as yours (i.e., that
this is an appropriate e-mail address, and that CRAN maintainers may
have misinterpreted
Hello R-pkg-devel,
Our package vcfR,
https://github.com/knausb/vcfR
has been removed from CRAN because they asked me to make changes that I
have not been able to make before their deadline. One of the issues was
that the moniker
"briank.lists"
is not appropriate and that we should see CRAN
On 22/07/2020 5:40 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote:
Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-07-22 21:42:
On 22/07/2020 1:25 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote:
[...]
The problem is that I cannot reproduce it as well. Only CHECK laments
about dev.off() which I changed to graphics.off() in the meantime.
Duncan Murdoch wrote on 2020-07-22 21:42:
> On 22/07/2020 1:25 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote:
>> [...]
>> The problem is that I cannot reproduce it as well. Only CHECK laments
>> about dev.off() which I changed to graphics.off() in the meantime.
>>
>> library(grDevices)
>> foo <- TRUE # shall we
Following WRE 1.5.6 (Namespaces with S4 classes and methods), you should
have "Depends: methods" in your DESCRIPTION, and "import(methods)" or a
more selective "importFrom(methods, ...)" directive in your NAMESPACE.
Then you would usually use the NAMESPACE directive
On 22/07/2020 1:25 p.m., Helmut Schütz wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Serguei Sokol wrote on 2020-07-22 15:51:
Hmm... I see 2 possibilities for still getting an error while the
concerned part of code is not supposed to be run:
- either you are running not updated version of your package;
I _can_
Hi Serguei,
Serguei Sokol wrote on 2020-07-22 15:51:
Hmm... I see 2 possibilities for still getting an error while the
concerned part of code is not supposed to be run:
- either you are running not updated version of your package;
I _can_ built the package and it runs as intended. Only the
On 22/07/2020 8:36 a.m., Helmut Schütz wrote:
Dear all,
I have two variables, foo and bar. The first is TRUE if a png should be
created and the second is TRUE if an already existing one should be
overwritten.
At the end of the plot I had
if (foo | (foo & bar)) dev.off()
This worked as expected
I suspect your foo and bar variables are not logical anymore... insufficient
info. However, why aren't you using short-circuit && and || operators?
On July 22, 2020 5:36:06 AM PDT, "Helmut Schütz"
wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>I have two variables, foo and bar. The first is TRUE if a png should be
>
Le 22/07/2020 à 14:36, Helmut Schütz a écrit :
Dear all,
I have two variables, foo and bar. The first is TRUE if a png should be
created and the second is TRUE if an already existing one should be
overwritten.
At the end of the plot I had
if (foo | (foo & bar)) dev.off()
This worked as
Dear all,
I have two variables, foo and bar. The first is TRUE if a png should be
created and the second is TRUE if an already existing one should be
overwritten.
At the end of the plot I had
if (foo | (foo & bar)) dev.off()
This worked as expected in all versions of my package built in R up
11 matches
Mail list logo
