R-alpha: 0.6

Ross Ihaka (ihaka@stat.auckland.ac.nz)
Wed, 22 May 1996 14:12:18 +1200

Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 14:12:18 +1200
From: Ross Ihaka <ihaka@stat.auckland.ac.nz>
Message-Id: <199605220212.OAA28414@stat.auckland.ac.nz>
To: pgilbert@bank-banque-canada.ca (Paul Gilbert)
Subject: R-alpha: 0.6
In-Reply-To: <96May21.140931edt.29453@mailgate.bank-banque-canada.ca>

Paul Gilbert writes:
 > In S I use the function "do.call" to call a function and provide its
 > arguments in a list:
 >      r <- do.call("foo", arglist)
 > but do.call does not seem to be available in R. Is there a way to do
 > this?

It's a feature I want too.  Should be ready this week or next.

 > Also, I'm not sure if this should be described as a bug or a feature,
 > since it led me to discover a bug in my code. In either case the so
 > called "trivially true" is different in R 0.6 than it is in Splus.
 > Splus gives
 > > all(NULL == NULL)
 > [1] T
 > R 0.6 gives
 > > all(NULL == NULL)
 > Error: comparison is possible only for vector types
I'm happy with this being either a bug or a feature.  Anyone else care
to venture an opinion?

Robert and I decided at one point to try to make things that probably
arise from programming errors produce error messages and terminate the
computation.  This is one such case.  Another is

	x <- numeric(10)
	x[11] <- 17

In my own work exceeding array bounds is almost always the result of
an error and I'd rather know sooner than later.
r-testers mailing list -- To (un)subscribe, send
subscribe	or	unsubscribe
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-testers-request@stat.math.ethz.ch