Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
> As a workaround use evaluate=FALSE argument to update and
> evaluate it yourself fetching the environment from the innards
> of the lm structure:
>
> f <- function() {
> DF <- data.frame(y = 1:12, x1 = gl(2, 1, 12), x2 = gl(2,6))
> lm(y ~ x1, DF)
> }
>
> f.lm <- f()
> e <- attr(terms(f.lm), ".Environment")
> eval(update(f.lm, formula = y ~ x2, evaluate = FALSE), e)
Thanks, or even just:
e <- environment(formula(f.lm))
But this was more of a bug report. Is update.default wrong? Should it
be changed? I don't see how evaluating in update's parent environment
would ever be better default behavior than the formula's environment.
- Martin
>
>
> On 10/10/06, Martin C. Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> update.default, which is the method used to update "lm" objects (among
>> others), extracts the "call" element from it's first argument, updates
>> it, then evaluates it in the parent.frame(). Shouldn't it be evaluated
>> in environment(formula(object)), if that's non-NULL?
>>
>> I ask because I call "lm" from within a function, and the data argument
>> is a local variable of that function. After that, I can't update the
>> model any more, since the new lm() call (the one evaled in
>> parent.frame()) can't find the data.
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> [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
>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>>
______________________________________________
[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
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
