Hi Ge,
On 06/28/2013 04:45 AM, Ge Tan wrote:
Hi Hervé,
Thank you so much!!! I tweaked it a little and it works exactly in the
Biostrings way which I want to learn!
You are my idol!!
One minor question I want to ask is when I change the
alloc_XRawList(BStringSet, BString, ans_width));
to
Hi, all,
Many thanks for your suggestions/infos!
For my previous question: how to get the size of R object, so that the C++
process can know exact bytes to read, and receive the R objectvia socket
connection, for now, I used the following way to achieve this. It worked
for me. Pls feel free to
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Ben Bolker bbol...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The lmer() function in the lme4 package has some code of the form
mc - match.call()
mc[[1]] - as.name(lFormula)
lmod - eval(mc, parent.frame(1L))
this is a fairly
On 13-06-27 11:49 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The lmer() function in the lme4 package has some code of the form
mc - match.call()
mc[[1]] - as.name(lFormula)
lmod - eval(mc, parent.frame(1L))
this is a fairly common idiom in R, found e.g. in
Dear list,
Utils::modifyList() drops NULL components in its second argument, instead of
adding them to the first argument. Compare:
modifyList(x=list(A=1), val=list(B=2, C=3))
$A
[1] 1
$B
[1] 2
$C
[1] 3
modifyList(x=list(A=1), val=list(B=NULL, C=3))
$A
[1] 1
$C
[1] 3
To me this seems
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Raubertas, Richard
richard_rauber...@merck.com wrote:
Dear list,
Utils::modifyList() drops NULL components in its second argument, instead of
adding them to the first argument. Compare:
modifyList(x=list(A=1), val=list(B=2, C=3))
$A
[1] 1
$B
[1] 2
$C
See response inline below.
-Original Message-
From: Deepayan Sarkar [mailto:deepayan.sar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 7:17 AM
To: Raubertas, Richard
Cc: R-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] 'modifyList' drops (not adds) NULL components
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com writes:
[snip]
The other choice is to use the explicit ::, i.e.
mc[[1]] - quote(lmer::lFormula)
This would be the solution I'd prefer, but you seem to have some
prejudice against :: .
I just thought that the whole point of using the
On 28/06/2013 12:42 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com writes:
[snip]
The other choice is to use the explicit ::, i.e.
mc[[1]] - quote(lmer::lFormula)
This would be the solution I'd prefer, but you seem to have some
prejudice against :: .
I just
On Jun 28, 2013, at 18:42 , Ben Bolker wrote:
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com writes:
[snip]
The other choice is to use the explicit ::, i.e.
mc[[1]] - quote(lmer::lFormula)
This would be the solution I'd prefer, but you seem to have some
prejudice against :: .
Hi Ge,
On 06/28/2013 04:45 AM, Ge Tan wrote:
Hi Hervé,
Thank you so much!!! I tweaked it a little and it works exactly in the
Biostrings way which I want to learn!
You are my idol!!
One minor question I want to ask is when I change the
alloc_XRawList(BStringSet, BString, ans_width));
to
On 13-06-28 01:56 PM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 28/06/2013 12:42 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.duncan at gmail.com writes:
[snip]
The other choice is to use the explicit ::, i.e.
mc[[1]] - quote(lmer::lFormula)
This would be the solution I'd prefer, but you seem to
On 13-06-28 03:57 PM, Peter Meilstrup wrote:
Well, once you begin messing with eval.parent(), you _are_ telling R
what environment to work in, and things have the potential to go wrong
at that point because you're telling R to work in environment you don't
know anything about. Having to be
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Ben Bolker bbol...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13-06-28 03:57 PM, Peter Meilstrup wrote:
Well, once you begin messing with eval.parent(), you _are_ telling R
what environment to work in, and things have the potential to go wrong
at that point because you're telling
14 matches
Mail list logo
