Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

> On 21 Oct 2016, at 19:17 , Wilm Schumacher wrote: > > Am 21.10.2016 um 18:10 schrieb William Dunlap: >> Are you saying that >>f1 <- function(x) log(x) >>f2 <- function(x) { log } (x) >> should act differently? > yes. Or more precisely: I would expect that.

Re: [Bioc-devel] Question about InteractionSet package

Oops, sorry, my bad. I read the warning and thought it was trying to install the package from CRAN, but I was just reading it wrong, that warning is irrelevant to your situation. Sounds like your situation is resolved based on your off-list email to me. Dan - Original Message - >

Re: [Bioc-devel] Question about InteractionSet package

You need to tell us the command that produced that error. InteractionSet is a Bioconductor package, not a CRAN package. Maybe you tried to install it with install.packages() instead of biocLite()? See the "Installlation" section of

Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

Hi, Am 21.10.2016 um 18:10 schrieb William Dunlap: Are you saying that f1 <- function(x) log(x) f2 <- function(x) { log } (x) should act differently? yes. Or more precisely: I would expect that. "Should" implies, that I want to change something. I just want to understand the behavior

Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

You might find it useful to look at what body() shows you for your example and to think about what return does. Best, luke On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Wilm Schumacher wrote: Hi, thx for the reply. Unfortunately that is not a simplified version of the problem. You have a function, call it and get

Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

Hi, thx for the reply. Unfortunately that is not a simplified version of the problem. You have a function, call it and get the result (numeric in, numeric out in that case). For simplicity lets use the "return" case: ## foobar<-function(x) { return(sqrt(x)) }(2) ## which is a function (numeric

Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

Here is a simplified version of your problem > { sqrt }(c(2,4,8)) [1] 1.414214 2.00 2.828427 Do you want that to act differently? Bill Dunlap TIBCO Software wdunlap tibco.com On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Wilm Schumacher wrote: > Hi, > > I hope this is

[R-pkg-devel] New libcurl coming / question for pkg authors

(didn't know where else to post this, but pkg authors seemed to be a good group to run this by) Some folks may know I work in cybersecurity and my org's been talking with the curl/libcurl community regarding: https://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2016-10/0076.html TLDR: there's a new libcurl/curl coming

[Bioc-devel] Question about InteractionSet package

Hi, I am currently developing a package which I want to submit to Bioconductor. I am using the R-devel version. I am trying to install the InteractionSet package with no success. I get the following warnings: Warning: unable to access index for repository

Re: [Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

Hi, sry for the double posting. I forgot to mention that this example ### f<-function(x) { return( 2*x ) }(2) class(f) f(3) f<-function(x) { return( 2*x ) }(4)(5) f(6) ### leads to ## > f<-function(x) { + return( 2*x ) + }(2) > > class(f) [1] "function" > > f(3) [1] 6 > >

[Rd] anonymous function parsing bug?

Hi, I hope this is the correct list for my question. I found a wired behaviour of my R installation on the evaluation of anonymous functions. minimal working example ### f<-function(x) { print( 2*x ) }(2) class(f) f(3) f<-function(x) { print( 2*x ) }(4)(5) f(6) ### leads to ###

Re: [Bioc-devel] Submitted package not available in Bioconductor 3.4

Dear Martin, Thanks for this! I was not aware that I should leave the issue open. Regards, Andreas -- Chantriolnt - Andreas Kapourani PhD Candidate in Data Science, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh

Re: [Bioc-devel] Submitted package not available in Bioconductor 3.4

On 10/21/2016 05:30 AM, Andreas Kapouranis wrote: Hi, Recently I submitted a package named "BPRMeth" for Bioconductor and it was marked as accepted more than one month ago. Here is the link for my submission: https://github.com/Bioconductor/Contributions/issues/74 However, with the new

[Rd] Package install problem in R-devel under Windows

Hi, Using the latest R-devel under Windows, I've encountered the following problem when trying to install packages at the prompt: >R CMD INSTALL d:\inum_0.1-0.tar.gz * installing to library 'C:\Users\henwin\R\win-library\3.4' * installing *source* package 'inum' ... ** R ** preparing package