Re: [Rd] bug, feature of mistery?
Giuseppe Ragusa wrote:
Uwe,
- Where is *lexical* scoping involved?
Abuse of notation. I intended to say scoping.
- Are you really calling you code from a clean workspace?
Yes it is clean.
- Why don't use pass g through optim() to f? Please do so, because it
might be a scoping problem.
Tried that. Still no luck. z- does not get assigned even if i pass g
through optim
- The .C call in psi() should not matter unless you are doing strange
things in the part you omitted (...).
I do not think is the call to C. And I did not omit, psi() is the last
call. And again, same code works fine on the other machine.
Can you send me a reproducible example (off list), please (inlcuding
example data)?
Uwe
On Wed, 11 May 2005, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Giuseppe Ragusa wrote:
I have two machines a linux_amd64_x86 (gentoo_amd64) and a linux_x86. Both
run
R-2.1.0. I have a very long program (hopefully will become a package)
that works perfectly on the linux_amd_x64. Great means no error, no
problems and results that, where the analytic solution exists,
coincide with it. I have problem making the code run on the x64 machine. I
am baffled. The same code on the same version of R, different arch,
is behaving differently.
After hour of debugging, I traced down what is triggering the error on
the x86 machine.
the code snippet is the following similar to:
R
g - h(d)
f - function( lambda )
{
z - g %*% lambda
sum( psi(z) )
...
}
optim( init.value, f )
R
The function f() is using lexical scoping to get obtain g. The
function psi() is a call to a wrapper function that call a (.C) C
function doing some simple calculation on z.
- Where is *lexical* scoping involved?
- Are you really calling you code from a clean workspace?
- Why don't use pass g through optim() to f? Please do so, because it
might be a scoping problem.
- The .C call in psi() should not matter unless you are doing strange
things in the part you omitted (...).
Uwe Ligges
What's the problem? When f() is called, g is there, lambda is there,
but the assignment z - g %*% lambda results in a matrix of NaN. This
happens from the second time f() is called, i.e. the first time f() is
called from optim() after the C call has been made. The error is then
that passing a NaN vector to .C results in halted execution.
If I debug f() during the call to optim, I can without problem assign
z the correct value, but during the execution z is matrix(NaN, nr,
1).
At this point I can think of the following:
1) the external C code has errors
It is not a programming error, because when called from console it
returns the right results. Also, remember, the program work on my
other machine (the 64 bit);
2) R error (I do not think so)
3) Compiling error
Can be the gcc is messing thing around?
on the 32bit machine
gcc version 3.3.5 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.5-r1, ssp-3.3.2-3, pie-8.7.7.1)
on the 64-bit machine
gcc version 3.4.3 20041125 (Gentoo Linux 3.4.3-r1, ssp-3.4.3-0, pie-8.7.7)
Any help, suggestions, thoughts?
Thank you.
Giuseppe Ragusa
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] bug, feature of mistery?
Giuseppe Ragusa wrote:
I have two machines a linux_amd64_x86 (gentoo_amd64) and a linux_x86. Both run
R-2.1.0. I have a very long program (hopefully will become a package)
that works perfectly on the linux_amd_x64. Great means no error, no
problems and results that, where the analytic solution exists,
coincide with it. I have problem making the code run on the x64 machine. I
am baffled. The same code on the same version of R, different arch,
is behaving differently.
After hour of debugging, I traced down what is triggering the error on
the x86 machine.
the code snippet is the following similar to:
R
g - h(d)
f - function( lambda )
{
z - g %*% lambda
sum( psi(z) )
...
}
optim( init.value, f )
R
The function f() is using lexical scoping to get obtain g. The
function psi() is a call to a wrapper function that call a (.C) C
function doing some simple calculation on z.
- Where is *lexical* scoping involved?
- Are you really calling you code from a clean workspace?
- Why don't use pass g through optim() to f? Please do so, because it
might be a scoping problem.
- The .C call in psi() should not matter unless you are doing strange
things in the part you omitted (...).
Uwe Ligges
What's the problem? When f() is called, g is there, lambda is there,
but the assignment z - g %*% lambda results in a matrix of NaN. This
happens from the second time f() is called, i.e. the first time f() is
called from optim() after the C call has been made. The error is then
that passing a NaN vector to .C results in halted execution.
If I debug f() during the call to optim, I can without problem assign
z the correct value, but during the execution z is matrix(NaN, nr,
1).
At this point I can think of the following:
1) the external C code has errors
It is not a programming error, because when called from console it
returns the right results. Also, remember, the program work on my
other machine (the 64 bit);
2) R error (I do not think so)
3) Compiling error
Can be the gcc is messing thing around?
on the 32bit machine
gcc version 3.3.5 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.5-r1, ssp-3.3.2-3, pie-8.7.7.1)
on the 64-bit machine
gcc version 3.4.3 20041125 (Gentoo Linux 3.4.3-r1, ssp-3.4.3-0, pie-8.7.7)
Any help, suggestions, thoughts?
Thank you.
Giuseppe Ragusa
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] bug, feature of mistery?
Uwe,
- Where is *lexical* scoping involved?
Abuse of notation. I intended to say scoping.
- Are you really calling you code from a clean workspace?
Yes it is clean.
- Why don't use pass g through optim() to f? Please do so, because it
might be a scoping problem.
Tried that. Still no luck. z- does not get assigned even if i pass g
through optim
- The .C call in psi() should not matter unless you are doing strange
things in the part you omitted (...).
I do not think is the call to C. And I did not omit, psi() is the last
call. And again, same code works fine on the other machine.
On Wed, 11 May 2005, Uwe Ligges wrote:
Giuseppe Ragusa wrote:
I have two machines a linux_amd64_x86 (gentoo_amd64) and a linux_x86. Both
run
R-2.1.0. I have a very long program (hopefully will become a package)
that works perfectly on the linux_amd_x64. Great means no error, no
problems and results that, where the analytic solution exists,
coincide with it. I have problem making the code run on the x64 machine. I
am baffled. The same code on the same version of R, different arch,
is behaving differently.
After hour of debugging, I traced down what is triggering the error on
the x86 machine.
the code snippet is the following similar to:
R
g - h(d)
f - function( lambda )
{
z - g %*% lambda
sum( psi(z) )
...
}
optim( init.value, f )
R
The function f() is using lexical scoping to get obtain g. The
function psi() is a call to a wrapper function that call a (.C) C
function doing some simple calculation on z.
- Where is *lexical* scoping involved?
- Are you really calling you code from a clean workspace?
- Why don't use pass g through optim() to f? Please do so, because it
might be a scoping problem.
- The .C call in psi() should not matter unless you are doing strange
things in the part you omitted (...).
Uwe Ligges
What's the problem? When f() is called, g is there, lambda is there,
but the assignment z - g %*% lambda results in a matrix of NaN. This
happens from the second time f() is called, i.e. the first time f() is
called from optim() after the C call has been made. The error is then
that passing a NaN vector to .C results in halted execution.
If I debug f() during the call to optim, I can without problem assign
z the correct value, but during the execution z is matrix(NaN, nr,
1).
At this point I can think of the following:
1) the external C code has errors
It is not a programming error, because when called from console it
returns the right results. Also, remember, the program work on my
other machine (the 64 bit);
2) R error (I do not think so)
3) Compiling error
Can be the gcc is messing thing around?
on the 32bit machine
gcc version 3.3.5 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.5-r1, ssp-3.3.2-3, pie-8.7.7.1)
on the 64-bit machine
gcc version 3.4.3 20041125 (Gentoo Linux 3.4.3-r1, ssp-3.4.3-0, pie-8.7.7)
Any help, suggestions, thoughts?
Thank you.
Giuseppe Ragusa
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
--
/
|Giuseppe Ragusa
|University of California, San Diego
|9500 Gilman Dr. 0508
|La Jolla, CA 92093
|http://weber.ucsd.edu/~gragusa
\
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
__
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Re: [Rd] bug, feature of mistery?
Giuseppe Ragusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have two machines a linux_amd64_x86 (gentoo_amd64) and a linux_x86. You might want to try running valgrind on your code on the 32bit machine. This may turn up a silent coding error that is manifesting on the 64bit platform. I think there is a new R CMD check option to do valgrind. + seth __ R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
