Re: [R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
The notes you get illustrate why they are useful, if you look at your rendered
documentation you probably will see something wrong. Thousands of packages on
CRAN, including some of mines have had this kind of infelicities for years.
Firstly, the two sets of braces suggest that you meant a description
environment, not itemize (in which its only argument doesn't need braces).
Secondly, in the value section, \item is implicitly enclosed in \describe and
you don't need to include the latter.
Georgi Boshnakov
Sent from Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
From: R-package-devel on behalf of
Patrick Giraudoux
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2024 7:09:22 pm
To: Dirk Eddelbuettel
Cc: R Package Development
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
OK. Clear enough. CRAN applies a new "filter" as it was going through
without crying a note since decades ;-). However, indeed, re-checking
the manual "Writing R extensions" my syntax was wrong...
Thanks for the guidance,
Patrick
Le 23/01/2024 � 19:58, Dirk Eddelbuettel a �crit :
> On 23 January 2024 at 19:39, Patrick Giraudoux wrote:
> | Has anyone an idea about what is going wrong ?
>
> \item has no braces following it. From a package I submitted today and for
> which I still have NEWS.Rd in the editor (indented here):
>
>\section{Changes in version 0.0.22 (2024-01-23)}{
> \itemize{
>\item Replace empty examples macros to satisfy CRAN request.
> }
>}
>
> Hth, Dirk
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel__;!!PDiH4ENfjr2_Jw!Gu9AhS4Yi4k5IC8TXv4B8xpznl-8-Jhl-cdxRZ6zVrRCdmDaSTVYpaG5XDoitdms9FuHQGV7adP-Q6WD6w2bMws_b5UnszsH5VsXFBMUIvFX4Nc$
[stat[.]ethz[.]ch]
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
OK. Clear enough. CRAN applies a new "filter" as it was going through
without crying a note since decades ;-). However, indeed, re-checking
the manual "Writing R extensions" my syntax was wrong...
Thanks for the guidance,
Patrick
Le 23/01/2024 à 19:58, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit :
> On 23 January 2024 at 19:39, Patrick Giraudoux wrote:
> | Has anyone an idea about what is going wrong ?
>
> \item has no braces following it. From a package I submitted today and for
> which I still have NEWS.Rd in the editor (indented here):
>
>\section{Changes in version 0.0.22 (2024-01-23)}{
> \itemize{
>\item Replace empty examples macros to satisfy CRAN request.
> }
>}
>
> Hth, Dirk
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
В Tue, 23 Jan 2024 19:39:54 +0100
Patrick Giraudoux пишет:
> \itemize{
> \item{.}{lm and glm objects can be passed directly as the upper
> scope of term addition (all terms added).
Inside the \itemize and \enumerate commands, the \item command doesn't
take any arguments:
https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/R-exts.html#Lists-and-tables
Instead, it starts a new paragraph with a number (\enumerate) or a
bullet point (\itemize). R CMD check is reminding you that \itemize{
\item{foo}{bar} } is equivalent to \itemize{ \item foo bar } without
any braces.
If you meant to highlight a word by making it an argument of the \item
command, use the \describe command. Here, you're highlighting a dot,
which would be rendered with a bullet point before it, so it's probably
neither semantically nor visually appropriate.
> \value{
> A \code{\link[sf]{sfc}} object, of POINT geometry, with the
> following columns:
> \itemize{
> \item{ID}{ ID number}
The same problem applies here.
Additionally, R CMD check is reminding you that \value{} is implicitly
a special case of a \describe{} environment:
https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/R-exts.html#index-_005cvalue
Since you're already using \item{}{} labels to name the components of
the value, just drop the \itemize{} (but keep its contents). \value{} is
enough.
--
Best regards,
Ivan
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
Re: [R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
On 23 January 2024 at 19:39, Patrick Giraudoux wrote:
| Has anyone an idea about what is going wrong ?
\item has no braces following it. From a package I submitted today and for
which I still have NEWS.Rd in the editor (indented here):
\section{Changes in version 0.0.22 (2024-01-23)}{
\itemize{
\item Replace empty examples macros to satisfy CRAN request.
}
}
Hth, Dirk
--
dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
[R-pkg-devel] lost braces note on CRAN pretest related to \itemize
Dear listers,
I meet a problem with the submission of the package pgirmess. In fact
the package goes through R CMD check --as-cran and R-wind-builder
smoothly with no problem, but submitted to CRAN, I get this:
Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windows-x86_64
Check: CRAN incoming feasibility, Result: Note_to_CRAN_maintainers
Maintainer: 'Patrick Giraudoux'
Flavor: r-devel-linux-x86_64-debian-gcc, r-devel-windows-x86_64
Check: Rd files, Result: NOTE
checkRd: (-1) mergeTrackObs.rd:24: Lost braces in \itemize; \value handles
\item{}{} directly
checkRd: (-1) mergeTrackObs.rd:25: Lost braces in \itemize; \value handles
\item{}{} directly
checkRd: (-1) mergeTrackObs.rd:26: Lost braces in \itemize; \value handles
\item{}{} directly
checkRd: (-1) selMod.rd:29-31: Lost braces in \itemize; meant \describe ?
checkRd: (-1) selMod.rd:32-33: Lost braces in \itemize; meant \describe ?
checkRd: (-1) selMod.rd:54: Lost braces in \itemize; meant \describe ?
checkRd: (-1) selMod.rd:55: Lost braces in \itemize; meant \describe ?
The code that seems to make problem (although braces are balanced; I
wonder why a claim 'lost braces') is
- for mergeTrackObs.rd
\value{
A \code{\link[sf]{sfc}} object, of POINT geometry, with the following
columns:
\itemize{
\item{ID}{ ID number}
\item{nObs}{ The number of observations in the interval}
\item{geometry} {POINT geometry}
}
}
- for selMod.rd
\details{
This function provides parameters used in the information theoretic
methods for model comparisons.
\itemize{
\item{.}{lm and glm objects can be passed directly as the upper scope
of term addition (all terms added).
Every model from y\eqn{\sim}{~}1 is computed adding one term at a
time until the upper scope model is derived. This is a stepwise analysis
where the terms are added sequentially and this does NOT provide all
combinations of terms and interactions. Offset terms cannot be proceeded
here.
}
\item{.}{A list of user specified lm, glm, nls, lme or nlme objects
(actually any object for which AIC and logLik functions are applicable)
to compare can alternately be passed.
}
}
}
Has anyone an idea about what is going wrong ?
Patrick
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
