Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
Felix
__
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
On 13-04-18 7:31 AM, Felix Schönbrodt wrote:
Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
This is difficult in most cases, because most
On 04/18/2013 05:57 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 13-04-18 7:31 AM, Felix Schönbrodt wrote:
Hello,
is there a convenient way to suppress only *specific* warnings? (I know about
?suppressWarnings)
I depend on another package, from which I want to suppress only some warnings,
but not others.
For my logging package (futile.logger) any log statements coming from a package
are assigned to a package namespace. This way you have control of log messages
at a package level (e.g. I can set the default log threshold to DEBUG, while
package 'A' has a log threshold of WARN).
I seems a
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com
on Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:51:25 -0400 writes:
On 12-10-25 5:28 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Sorry guys, for coming late,
but *please* don't go there.
I've been there years ago,
and found later why the approach is flawed by
On Oct 26, 2012, at 11:17 , Martin Maechler wrote:
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com
on Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:51:25 -0400 writes:
On 12-10-25 5:28 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Sorry guys, for coming late,
but *please* don't go there.
I've been there years ago,
and found later why
On 26/10/2012 12:04, peter dalgaard wrote:
On Oct 26, 2012, at 11:17 , Martin Maechler wrote:
Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com
on Thu, 25 Oct 2012 06:51:25 -0400 writes:
On 12-10-25 5:28 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Sorry guys, for coming late,
but *please* don't go there.
I've
Sorry guys, for coming late,
but *please* don't go there.
I've been there years ago,
and found later why the approach is flawed by design :
Internationalization / Localization:
- If the warning comes from a standard R function,
the warning is almost surely different in a (say) German
On 12-10-25 5:28 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
Sorry guys, for coming late,
but *please* don't go there.
I've been there years ago,
and found later why the approach is flawed by design :
Internationalization / Localization:
- If the warning comes from a standard R function,
the warning is
On Sun, 21 Oct 2012, Martin Morgan wrote:
On 10/21/2012 12:28 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
Not desperately important, but nice to have and possibly of use to
others, is the ability to suppress specific warnings rather than
suppressing warnings indiscriminately. I often know of a specific
warning
Not desperately important, but nice to have and possibly of use to
others, is the ability to suppress specific warnings rather than
suppressing warnings indiscriminately. I often know of a specific
warning that I want to ignore (because I know that's it's a false
positive/ignorable), but the
On 10/21/2012 12:28 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
Not desperately important, but nice to have and possibly of use to
others, is the ability to suppress specific warnings rather than
suppressing warnings indiscriminately. I often know of a specific
warning that I want to ignore (because I know
On 12-10-21 09:08 PM, Martin Morgan wrote:
On 10/21/2012 12:28 PM, Ben Bolker wrote:
Not desperately important, but nice to have and possibly of use to
others, is the ability to suppress specific warnings rather than
suppressing warnings indiscriminately. I often know of a specific
13 matches
Mail list logo
