Github user felixcheung commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14558#discussion_r74693053
--- Diff: R/pkg/R/mllib.R ---
@@ -602,14 +599,14 @@ setMethod("spark.survreg", signature(data =
"SparkDataFrame", formula = "formula
# Returns a summary of the AFT survival regression model produced by
spark.survreg,
# similarly to R's summary().
-#' @param object A fitted AFT survival regression model
+#' @param object a fitted AFT survival regression model.
#' @return \code{summary} returns a list containing the model's
coefficients,
#' intercept and log(scale)
#' @rdname spark.survreg
#' @export
#' @note summary(AFTSurvivalRegressionModel) since 2.0.0
setMethod("summary", signature(object = "AFTSurvivalRegressionModel"),
- function(object, ...) {
+ function(object) {
--- End diff --
thinking more about, I think the reason is because R's base::summary has in
fact the `...`
https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/base/html/summary.html
Could you test if base::summary still work? I think we would prefer
omitting `...` for all our `summary` functions but we need to make sure doing
so doesn't mask it
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
