As this happens in exactly the same way in 1.8.1 and 1.9.0, why are you
blaming `recent changes in R 1.9.x'? I am baffled as to what you think is
`recent'.
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Warnes, Gregory R wrote:
>
> With the recent changes in R 1.9.x, it is now impossible to properly call
> plot on a formula() where the formula is provided via a named first
> argument. On today's R-1.9.1-alpha:
>
> > x <- 1:10
> > y <- rnorm(x,0.25)
> >
> > plot(x~y)
> >
> > plot(x=x~y)
> Error in terms.formula(formula, data = data) :
> argument is not a valid model
> >
> > plot(formula=x~y)
> Error in plot(formula = x ~ y) : Argument "x" is missing, with no default
> >
>
> This occurs because plot.formula is no longer directly callable,
It is, via graphics:::plot.formula.
> and the
> first argument to plot.formula() is 'formula' while the first argument to
> plot() is 'x'. Consequently one cannot properly pass a named first
> argument since it will either fail for plot() or for plot.formula(). [I
> suspect this is one reason why R CMD check complains about S3 methods that
> don't match the call of the base method.]
>
> This is much of a problem in interactive use, but it does cause problems in
> functions, like my gregmisc::overplot(), which use the standard idiom
>
> m <- match.call()
> m[[1]] <- as.name('plot')
> eval(m, parent.frame() )
Not a standard idiom for a generic with a formula method, and I think you
really should be dispatching to the method here.
[...]
--
Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
