Re: [R] Error generated by nlme::gnls

2022-07-28 Thread Martin Maechler
> Bill Dunlap > on Sun, 24 Jul 2022 08:51:09 -0700 writes: > I think the intent of this code was to see if the formula > had solely a literal 1 on the right hand side. Then > !identical(pp[[3]], 1) would do it, avoiding the overhead > of calling deparse. Note that th

Re: [R] Error generated by nlme::gnls

2022-07-24 Thread Bill Dunlap
I think the intent of this code was to see if the formula had solely a literal 1 on the right hand side. Then !identical(pp[[3]], 1) would do it, avoiding the overhead of calling deparse. Note that the 1 might be an integer, which the current code would (erroneously) not catch, so !identical(pp

Re: [R] Error generated by nlme::gnls

2022-07-23 Thread Ivan Krylov
On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 16:03:24 +1200 Rolf Turner wrote: > My impression is that if the right hand side of a formula gets "too > long", then it gets split into parts --- which messes everything up. For new enough R (≥ 4.0), it's possible to use deparse1() [*], which guarantees to return a single st

Re: [R] Error generated by nlme::gnls

2022-07-23 Thread Rolf Turner
On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 21:00:25 -0400 Ben Tupper wrote: > Could this be related to a new if() behavior introduced in v4.2.0 ? > See the "SIGNIFICANT USER-VISIBLE CHANGES" for v4.2.0 in the NEWS > > https://cloud.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/NEWS.html No. What's going on is much weirder t

Re: [R] Error generated by nlme::gnls

2022-07-23 Thread Ben Tupper
Could this be related to a new if() behavior introduced in v4.2.0 ? See the "SIGNIFICANT USER-VISIBLE CHANGES" for v4.2.0 in the NEWS https://cloud.r-project.org/doc/manuals/r-release/NEWS.html On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 6:26 PM Aaron Crowley wrote: > > Approximately 6 months ago, I successfully pe