On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Luke Tierney wrote: > On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, John Chambers wrote: > > > I think this is a consequence of the extra context added to make methods > > work right with R lexical scoping, namespaces, etc. Or a subtlety in > > R's definition of missing()? > > > > The problem is that somehow the default expression for argument `ncol' > > makes that argument appear NOT to be missing. But an attempt to > > evaluate it fails because the local variable `n' hasn't been defined > > yet. > > > > The following debugging snippets, using trace on the method for > > "numeric", show what's happening. But as to why, we need some expert > > help! (Luke?) > > We need a bit more info transferred across from the generic and we > need to reset the environments of the promises for missing arguments. > I'll look into it.
A workaround should be in place in R-devel now. luke -- Luke Tierney University of Iowa Phone: 319-335-3386 Department of Statistics and Fax: 319-335-3017 Actuarial Science 241 Schaeffer Hall email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Iowa City, IA 52242 WWW: http://www.stat.uiowa.edu ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
