Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 7:58 PM Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > Would it be good enough to pass it as a formula? Using your definition of > foo > > foo(~ A -> result) > ## result <- ~A > > foo(~ result <- A) > ## ~result <- A > Yes, to pass as a formula would be the idea. It's just that the

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

Would it be good enough to pass it as a formula? Using your definition of foo foo(~ A -> result) ## result <- ~A foo(~ result <- A) ## ~result <- A On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 4:18 AM Dmitri Popavenko wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I am aware this is a parser issue, but is there any

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

ions or have the ability to do conversions. But those ideas belong in a more mainstream R mailing list. -Original Message- From: Duncan Murdoch Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2024 6:32 AM To: Adrian Dușa ; avi.e.gr...@gmail.com Cc: r-devel Subject: Re: [Rd] capture "->"

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 1:31 PM Duncan Murdoch wrote: > You can't change the parser. Changes like `+` <- `-` change the > function that is called when the expression contains a function call to > `+`; this happens in `eval()`, not in `parse()`. There are never any > function calls to `->`,

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

You can't change the parser. Changes like `+` <- `-` change the function that is called when the expression contains a function call to `+`; this happens in `eval()`, not in `parse()`. There are never any function calls to `->`, because the parser outputs a call to `<-` with the operands

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

That would have been an elegant solution, but it doesn't seem to work: > `->` <- `+` > 1 -> 3 # expecting 4 Error in 3 <- 1 : invalid (do_set) left-hand side to assignment It is possible to reassign other multiple character operators: > `%%` <- `+` > 1 %% 3 [1] 4 The assignment operator `->` is

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

o: avi.e.gr...@gmail.com Cc: r-devel ; Dmitri Popavenko Subject: Re: [Rd] capture "->" I would also be interested in that. For me, this is interesting for my QCA package, over which Dmitri and I have exchanged a couple of messages. The "<-" operator is used to denote n

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

;<<-" too? > > I do wonder if you can re-declare the assignment operators or would that > mess up the parser. > > -Original Message- > From: R-devel On Behalf Of Duncan Murdoch > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 9:23 AM > To: Dmitri Popavenko > Cc

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

it also support the global assignment of "->>" as compared to ""<<-" too? I do wonder if you can re-declare the assignment operators or would that mess up the parser. -Original Message- From: R-devel On Behalf Of Duncan Murdoch Sent: Friday, March 1, 2

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On 01/03/2024 8:51 a.m., Dmitri Popavenko wrote: On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 1:00 PM Duncan Murdoch > wrote: ... I was thinking more of you doing something like   parse(text = "A -> B", keep.source = TRUE) I forget what the exact rules are for

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 1:00 PM Duncan Murdoch wrote: > ... > I was thinking more of you doing something like > > parse(text = "A -> B", keep.source = TRUE) > > I forget what the exact rules are for attaching srcrefs to arguments of > functions, but I do remember they are a little strange,

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On 01/03/2024 5:25 a.m., Dmitri Popavenko wrote: Dear Duncan, On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 11:30 AM Duncan Murdoch > wrote: ... If you parse it with srcrefs, you could look at the source.  The parser doesn't record whether it was A -> B or B <- A

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

Dear Duncan, On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 11:30 AM Duncan Murdoch wrote: > ... > If you parse it with srcrefs, you could look at the source. The parser > doesn't record whether it was A -> B or B <- A anywhere else. > Thank you, this gets me closer but it still needs a little push: > foo <-

Re: [Rd] capture "->"

On 01/03/2024 4:17 a.m., Dmitri Popavenko wrote: Hi everyone, I am aware this is a parser issue, but is there any possibility to capture the use of the inverse assignment operator into a formula? Something like: foo <- function(x) substitute(x) gives: foo(A -> B) B <- A I wonder if

Re: [Rd] capture error messages from loading shared objects

Thanks Henrik and Bill, Indeed, but I do have a function called tryCatchWEM() in package admisc that captures all that. My use case was to test for different architectures (for instance, arm64 vs Intel MacOS) embedding R in cross-platform applications. I needed to test if the package could be

Re: [Rd] capture error messages from loading shared objects

Careful; tryCatch() on non-error conditions will break out of what's evaluated, e.g. res <- tryCatch({ cat("1\n") message("2") cat("3\n") 42 }, message = identity) will output '1' but not '3', because it returns as soon as the first message() is called. To "record" messages (same for

Re: [Rd] capture error messages from loading shared objects

If you would like to save the error message instead of suppressing it, you can use tryCatch(message=function(e)e, ...). -BIll On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:55 AM Adrian Dusa wrote: > Once again, Ivan, many thanks. > Yes, that does solve it. > Best wishes, > Adrian > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 11:28 

Re: [Rd] capture error messages from loading shared objects

Once again, Ivan, many thanks. Yes, that does solve it. Best wishes, Adrian On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 11:28 AM Ivan Krylov wrote: > В Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:46:45 +0100 > Adrian Dusa пишет: > > > tryCatch(requireNamespace("foobar"), error = function(e) e) > > I think you meant loadNamespace()

Re: [Rd] capture error messages from loading shared objects

В Tue, 28 Nov 2023 10:46:45 +0100 Adrian Dusa пишет: > tryCatch(requireNamespace("foobar"), error = function(e) e) I think you meant loadNamespace() (which throws errors), not requireNamespace() (which internally uses tryCatch(loadNamespace(...)) and may or may not print the error depending on

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com wrote: x - system2(Rscript, -e \install.packages('MASS', repos='http://probability.ca/cran')\, stdout=TRUE, stderr=TRUE) Thank you, this suggestion seems to work (although I agree that starting 3 procs to install a single

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

You shouldn't assume - use file.path(R.home(bin), R) Hadley On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Jeroen Ooms jeroen.o...@stat.ucla.edu wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com wrote: x - system2(Rscript, -e \install.packages('MASS',

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Simon Urbanek simon.urba...@r-project.org wrote: On top of my head for full capture I can only think of custom C code that will re-direct stderr/out FDs as desired (it's really trivial to re-direct to files, for dynamic capture it's a little more involved but

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On 13-09-24 10:37 AM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com wrote: x - system2(Rscript, -e \install.packages('MASS', repos='http://probability.ca/cran')\, stdout=TRUE, stderr=TRUE) Thank you, this suggestion seems to work (although I agree

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On 13-09-23 2:17 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: Is there any way to capture output (both stdout and stderr) from install.packages? Solutions like sink and capture.output don't work because the install.packages calls out to system2 which is executed in a separate process: test -

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

Duncan, On Sep 23, 2013, at 10:20 PM, Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com wrote: On 13-09-23 2:17 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: Is there any way to capture output (both stdout and stderr) from install.packages? Solutions like sink and capture.output don't work because the install.packages calls

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On 13-09-23 6:34 PM, Simon Urbanek wrote: Duncan, On Sep 23, 2013, at 10:20 PM, Duncan Murdoch murdoch.dun...@gmail.com wrote: On 13-09-23 2:17 PM, Jeroen Ooms wrote: Is there any way to capture output (both stdout and stderr) from install.packages? Solutions like sink and capture.output

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

Brian Ripley's reply describes how it is done in the tools package. For example, as I sent privately to Jeroen, x - system2(Rscript, -e \install.packages('MASS', repos='http://probability.ca/cran')\, stdout=TRUE, stderr=TRUE) captures all of the output from installing MASS. As Jeroen

Re: [Rd] Capture output of install.packages (pipe system2)

On 13-09-23 08:20 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote: Brian Ripley's reply describes how it is done in the tools package. For example, as I sent privately to Jeroen, x - system2(Rscript, -e \install.packages('MASS', repos='http://probability.ca/cran')\, stdout=TRUE, stderr=TRUE) captures all of the