On 12/11/17 08:08, Georgi Boshnakov wrote:
It is more subtle than that.
\Sexpr triggers the creation of "partial Rd database" which becomes part of the
built package (the tar.gz file), although what exactly happens may also depend on 'stage'
options of the \Sexpr's.
... However when I do the
#x27;XXX_3.4.1.tar.gz'
-Original Message-
From: R-package-devel [mailto:r-package-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf
Of Rolf Turner
Sent: 10 November 2017 20:01
To: Duncan Murdoch
Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Macros in Rd files --- supplemen
On 10/11/17 09:29, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and
er
llation of html documentation.
Georgi Boshnakov
-Original Message-
From: R-package-devel [mailto:r-package-devel-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf
Of Duncan Murdoch
Sent: 09 November 2017 23:08
To: Rolf Turner
Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Macros in Rd files.
O
Hi Rolf,
Another place to look for macros in Rd files would be in the spatstat
package which I know you are quite familiary with ;-)
However, I think our macros are plain LaTeX without calls to \Sexpr so
it may behave differently than the case at hand.
Cheers,
Ege
On 11/10/2017 02:00 AM, Rolf
On 10/11/17 13:10, François Michonneau wrote:
A github search might be helpful to identify packages that define macros
in their Rd files:
https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=user%3Acran+extension%3Ard+newcommand&type=Code
Thanks. Looking into it.
cheers,
Rolf
--
Technical Editor ANZ
A github search might be helpful to identify packages that define macros in
their Rd files:
https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=user%3Acran+extension%3Ard+newcommand&type=Code
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
>
> On 10/11/17 12:00, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
> [Rolf Turner
On 10/11/17 12:00, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
[Rolf Turner wrote:]
... when I do the "R CMD
build" thing, when it comes to the "* building the PDF package manual"
step it says "Hmm ... looks like a package" (no shit, Sherlock!) and
emits a huge amount of verbose LaTeX diagnostics.
"Normally" one
On 09/11/2017 3:05 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and e
On 09/11/2017 3:05 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and e
On 09/11/2017 3:29 PM, Rolf Turner wrote:
... Mr. Speaker.
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I re
... Mr. Speaker.
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.
This worked for
On 09/11/17 23:40, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.
This worked for me:
\newcommand
On 09/11/17 23:06, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Ah, yes. Of course! Duh! (Slaps forehead vigorously!)
Thanks.
cheers,
Rolf
--
Technical Editor ANZJS
Department of Statistics
University of Auckland
Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276
___
On 09/11/2017 5:06 AM, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Note the % may be a comment?
Yes, and the body should be written in Rd markup, not R. Working out
the appropriate number of escapes is painful; I recommend trial and error.
This worked for me:
\newcommand{\today}{\Sexpr{format(Sys.Date(),"\\\%d/\\
Note the % may be a comment?
Uwe
On 09.11.2017 06:05, Rolf Turner wrote:
I tried to define a macro to produce today's date (like unto the
"\today" command in LaTeX):
\newcommand{\today}{format(Sys.date(),"%d/%m/%Y")}
I put this into my *.Rd file just before invoking it. (Something like
"
I tried to define a macro to produce today's date (like unto the
"\today" command in LaTeX):
\newcommand{\today}{format(Sys.date(),"%d/%m/%Y")}
I put this into my *.Rd file just before invoking it. (Something like
"I don't think I will do any more work today (i.e. \today).")
When I did
17 matches
Mail list logo
