[Rd] Bug in the "reformulate" function in stats package
Ben Bolker
bbo|ker @end|ng |rom gm@||@com
Thu Apr 18 17:51:33 CEST 2019
Your file didn't make it through the mailing list (which is quite
restrictive about which types/extensions it will take).
I appreciate your enthusiasm and persistence for this issue, but I
suspect you may have trouble convincing R-core to adopt your changes --
they are "better", "easier", "more intuitive" for you ... but how sure
are you they are completely backward compatible, have no performance
issues, will not break in unusual cases ... ?
Hopefully someone here will set up a bugzilla account so you can post
your patch/it can be further discussed there, if you want to purseu this ...
cheers
Ben Bolker
On 2019-04-18 7:30 a.m., Saren Tasciyan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for writing this late, I was very busy. I started this discussion
> here. I wish I could write to bugs.r-project.org, but I don't have an
> account and I will write here instead.
>
> Meanwhile, I solved my problem with a simpler fix (please see attached
> file)/.
> /
>
> This requires that term labels are not "ticked". I think this is better,
> since it is easier to have column names unticked.
>
> New development function is IMO unnecessarily complicated. It requires
> strings to be ticked or as.name(). It is more intuitive to have a vector
> of column names.
>
> Best,
>
> Saren
>
>
> On 05.04.19 09:38, Martin Maechler wrote:
>>>>>>> Ben Bolker
>>>>>>> on Thu, 4 Apr 2019 12:46:37 -0400 writes:
>> > Proposed patch
>>
>> Thank you Ben!
>>
>>
>> [the rest is technical nit-picking .. but hopefully interesting
>> to the smart R-devel reader base:]
>>
>> There was a very subtle thinko in your patch which is not easily
>> diagnosed from R's parse_Rd():
>>
>> Error in
>> parse_Rd("/u/maechler/R/D/r-devel/R/src/library/stats/man/delete.response.Rd",
>> :
>> Unexpected end of input (in " quoted string opened at
>> delete.response.Rd:78:63)
>> In addition: Warning message:
>> In
>> parse_Rd("/u/maechler/R/D/r-devel/R/src/library/stats/man/delete.response.Rd",
>> :
>> newline within quoted string at delete.response.Rd:74
>>
>> and even I needed more than a minute to find out that the
>> culprit was that
>>
>> reformulate(sprintf("`%s`", x))
>>
>> is not ok in *.Rd and must be
>>
>> reformulate(sprintf("`\%s`", x))
>>
>> ---------
>>
>> > (I think .txt files work OK as attachments to the list?)
>>
>> yes, typically -- what really counts is if your e-mail program
>> marks them with MIME-type 'text/plain'
>> and most E-mail programs are very "silly" / "safe" nowadays and
>> don't expect to have smart users and hence mark (and sometimes
>> encode) everything unknown as non-text.
>>
>> Using very old flexible e-mail interfaces such as Emacs VM allow
>> you to specify the MIME-type in addition to the file *and* it
>> also proposes smart defaults, I think by using something like
>> unix 'file' to determine that your 'foo.diff' file is plain text.
>> {{ .. and we all know that Windows is sillily using file extensions
>> to determine file type and only knows Windows-extensions plus
>> those added explicitly by software installed; so nowadays *.rda
>> is marked as an Rstudio file ... [argh].
>> }}
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> > On 2019-04-04 2:21 a.m., Martin Maechler wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Ben Bolker
>> >>>>>>> on Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:34:50 -0400 writes:
>> >>
>> >> > I suspect that the issue is addressed (obliquely) in the
>> examples,
>> >> > which shows that variables with spaces in them (or otherwise
>> >> > 'non-syntactic', i.e. not satisfying the constraints of
>> legal R symbols)
>> >> > can be handled by protecting them with backticks (``)
>> >>
>> >> > ## using non-syntactic names:
>> >> > reformulate(c("`P/E`", "`% Growth`"), response = as.name("+-"))
>> >>
>> >> > It seems to me there could be room for a *documentation*
>> patch (stating
>> >> > explicitly that if termlabels has length > 1 its elements are
>> >> > concatenated with "+", and explicitly stating that
>> non-syntactic names
>> >> > must be protected with back-ticks). (There is a little bit
>> of obscurity
>> >> > in the fact that the elements of termlabels don't have to be
>> >> > syntactically valid names: many will be included in formulas
>> if they can
>> >> > be interpreted as *parseable* expressions, e.g.
>> reformulate("x<2"))
>> >>
>> >> > I would be happy to give it a shot if the consensus is that
>> it would
>> >> > be worthwhile.
>> >>
>> >> I think it would be worthwhile to add to the docs a bit.
>> >>
>> >> [With currently just your and my vote, we have a 100% consensus
>> >> ;-)]
>> >>
>> >> Martin
>> >>
>> >> > One workaround to the OP's problem is below (may be worth
>> including
>> >> > as an example in docs)
>> >>
>> >> >> z <- c("a variable","another variable")
>> >> >> reformulate(z)
>> >> > Error in parse(text = termtext, keep.source = FALSE) :
>> >> > <text>:1:6: unexpected symbol
>> >> > 1: ~ a variable
>> >> > ^
>> >> >> reformulate(sprintf("`%s`",z))
>> >> > ~`a variable` + `another variable`
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > On 2019-03-29 11:54 a.m., J C Nash wrote:
>> >> >> The main thing is to post the "small reproducible example".
>> >> >>
>> >> >> My (rather long term experience) can be written
>> >> >>
>> >> >> if (exists("reproducible example") ) {
>> >> >> DeveloperFixHappens()
>> >> >> } else {
>> >> >> NULL
>> >> >> }
>> >> >>
>> >> >> JN
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 2019-03-29 11:38 a.m., Saren Tasciyan wrote:
>> >> >>> Well, first I can't sign in bugzilla myself, that is why I
>> wrote here first. Also, I don't know if I have the time at
>> >> >>> the moment to provide tests, multiple examples or more. If
>> that is not ok or welcomed, that is fine, I can come back,
>> >> >>> whenever I have more time to properly report the bug.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I didn't find the existing bug report, sorry for that.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Yes, it is related. My problem was that I have column
>> names with spaces and current solution doesn't solve it. I have a
>> >> >>> solution, which works for me and maybe also for others.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Either, someone can register me to bugzilla or I can post
>> it here, which could give some direction to developers. I
>> >> >>> don't mind whichever is preferred here.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Best,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Saren
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 29.03.19 09:29, Martin Maechler wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>> Saren Tasciyan
>> >> >>>>>>>>> on Thu, 28 Mar 2019 17:02:10 +0100 writes:
>> >> >>>> > Hi,
>> >> >>>> > I have found a bug in reformulate function and
>> have a solution for it. I
>> >> >>>> > was wondering, where I can submit it?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> > Best,
>> >> >>>> > Saren
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Well, you could have given a small reproducible example
>> >> >>>> depicting the bug, notably when posting here:
>> >> >>>> Just a prose text with no R code or other technical
>> content is
>> >> >>>> almost always not really appropriate fo the R-devel
>> mailing list.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Further, in such a case you should google a bit and
>> hopefully
>> >> >>>> have found
>> >> >>>> https://www.r-project.org/bugs.html
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> which also mention reproducibility (and many more useful
>> things).
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Then it also tells you about R's bug repository, also called
>> >> >>>> "R's bugzilla" at https://bugs.r-project.org/
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> and if you are diligent (but here, I'd say bugzilla is
>> >> >>>> (configured?) far from ideal), you'd also find bug PR#17359
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17359
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> which was reported already on Nov 2017 .. and only fixed
>> >> >>>> yesterday (in the "cleanup old bugs" process that happens
>> >> >>>> often before the big new spring release of R).
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> So is your bug the same as that one?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Martin
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> > --
>> >> >>>> > Saren Tasciyan
>> >> >>>> > /PhD Student / Sixt Group/
>> >> >>>> > Institute of Science and Technology Austria
>> >> >>>> > Am Campus 1
>> >> >>>> > 3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> > ______________________________________________
>> >> >>>> > R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >>>> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ______________________________________________
>> >> >>>> R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ______________________________________________
>> >> >> R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> >> >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> > ______________________________________________
>> >> > R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> >>
>> > x[DELETED ATTACHMENT external: reformulate.diff, plain text]
>> > ______________________________________________
>> > R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel using r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
More information about the R-devel
mailing list