On Sun, 7 May 2006, Heinz Tuechler wrote: > Hello Xiaochun Li! > > Thank you for submitting the function. At the time I had that problem I > solved it in a somewhat different way. > I changed a few lines in the print.survfit method. I introduced a parameter > "ret.res=FALSE" set to false to preserve the normal behaviour of print. > The second last line "invisible(x)" I changed to: > > if (ret.res) > invisible(list(x,x1)) > else > invisible(x) > > So print.survfit returned the results. Of course, Your method has the > advantage to work as long as the output structure of print.survfit does not > change. At the end I would prefer the original function to be changed and > when I find the time I will submit a worked proposal to Thomas Lumley, the > maintainer of the survival package. In that way it would be available also > in future versions of survival.
But all print() methods are required to return their first argument unchanged, so foo print(foo) do the same thing. See ?print. -- 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://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
